We regularly represent both investors and States in significant arbitrations under bilateral and multilateral investment treaties. We also help our investor clients navigate complex legal, cultural and political landscapes to secure the best ongoing protection for their foreign investments.
Recent experience includes representing:
Our experienced arbitration practitioners have expertise in representing a wide range of clients across a variety of sectors (including energy, mining, construction, technology, telecommunications, financial services, pharmaceuticals and many more) in complex, high value arbitrations.
Recent experience includes:
24th 9월 2021 //
The Emirate of Dubai has unexpectedly abolished the DIFC-LCIA Arbitration Centre's administering body, the DIFC Arbitration Institute (DAI), in an apparent effort to concentrate institutional arbitration in the Dubai International Arbitration Centre (DIAC), which is itself to undergo an overhaul as part of the same initiative. We take a closer look at this development and its consequences.
9th 9월 2021 //
The latest post on Arbitration Links takes a brief look at some of the potential options available to project finance actors in the event of regulatory changes impacting on the viability of an investment.
3rd 9월 2021 //
In a judgment dated 2 September 2021 in Komstroy v Moldova (Case C-741/19), the Court of Justice of the European Union has held intra-EU investment arbitration proceedings under the multilateral Energy Charter Treaty incompatible with EU law, and considered what constitutes an “investment” under the same treaty.
10th 8월 2021 //
In June 2021, the Commercial Court handed down judgment in PBO v (1) DONPRO and others [2021] EWHC 1951 (Comm). It found (among other things) that the tribunal’s refusal to permit the claimant to amend its statement of case, and the fact that the tribunal had reached certain conclusions in the award without giving the parties an opportunity to address those matters, constituted a serious irregularity. As such, the claimant’s challenges under s.68 Arbitration Act 1996 were successful.
27th 7월 2021 //
In a recent decision, the Paris Court of Appeal ruled that liability claims against arbitrators fall within the “arbitration exception” of Article 1(2)(d) of the Brussels I Recast, with the result that French private international law rules applied to determine jurisdiction. On that basis, it concluded that the French courts had jurisdiction to hear the claim as the seat of the arbitration, located in France, was the place where the arbitrator's services were performed.
9th 7월 2021 //
The Arbitration Foundation of Southern Africa’s international arbitration division, AFSA International, has published its new rules, which came into effect on 1 June 2021. These Rules are a welcome move that will help to grow South Africa's reputed position as an international arbitration seat.
6th 7월 2021 //
In General Dynamics v Libya [2021] UKSC 22 the UK Supreme Court held that the regime for service of English court proceedings on a foreign state contained in s.12 State Immunity Act 1978 was mandatory when seeking to enforce an arbitration award against it.
1st 7월 2021 //
On 9 March 2021, the new Singapore-Indonesia bilateral investment treaty entered into force. The BIT contains a number of significant features that will likely permeate into the overall ongoing efforts towards the modernization of international investment agreements.
24th 6월 2021 //
In Betamax Ltd v State Trading Corporation (Mauritius) [2021] UKPC 14, the Privy Council provided helpful guidance on the extent to which, where illegality is alleged, a domestic court may review an arbitral award on public policy grounds. The case was on appeal from the Mauritian Supreme Court after a challenge had been brought to set aside an award in the underlying arbitration.
Contact one of our experts for more information
