Circuit Court meaning

Amaplat Mauritius Ltd and Amari Nickel Holdings Zimbabwe Ltd stated on 18 July 2024 that Zimbabwe’s chief mining commissioner and its state-run mining company implicitly waived immunity from being brought before foreign courts by opting to arbitrate their mining dispute under the New York Convention. Moreover, because the Zimbabwe Mining Development Corp (ZMDC) is described as an alter ego of Zimbabwe, the filing argues the southern African nation likewise relinquished immunity from proceedings in the United States. According to the brief, Zimbabwe’s interference in ZMDC’s day-to-day operations, its disregard for corporate separateness in relation to ZMDC’s management and assets, and attempts to shift assets to new entities to avoid ZMDC’s creditors are classic indicators justifying treating a state and its state-owned enterprise as indistinguishable. Amaplat and Amari are pursuing enforcement of a 2019 ruling from a Zambian court that upheld the US$50m arbitral award at issue...

Spanish solar cases The DC Circuit is set to decide whether to enforce arbitral awards totalling about US$386m against Spain after it scaled back economic incentives for renewable energy projects, a ruling with significant implications for EU investors while the EU’s courts persist in rejecting enforcement of intra‑EU awards. The court will examine if enforcement is possible even though Europe’s highest court has concluded that the arbitration clause in the Energy Charter Treaty is invalid. The DC Circuit’s judgment will influence not only these awards but also more than a dozen further awards outstanding against Spain, as well as any previous and potential future arbitral awards granted to EU investors against EU Member States. Whatever the appeals court decides, the matter is very likely to be queued for a challenge before the US Supreme Court. In these proceedings, Dutch subsidiaries of US-based NextEra Energy Inc, Luxembourg-based 9REN Holding SARL and Blasket Renewable Investments LLC seek enforcement of their awards against Spain, together valued at approximately €359.3m (around US$386m). Blasket’s...

CC/DEVAS (MAURITIUS) LTD v ANTRIX CORP LTD, 605 US ____ (2025) (Consolidated with Devas Multimedia Private Ltd v Antrix Corp Ltd) What are the practical implications of this case? Devas v Antrix carries practical consequences for US parties pursuing claims in the United States against foreign sovereign states and their instrumentalities. The Court clarified that the FSIA alone governs when a foreign sovereign state can be deemed to have waived sovereign immunity. Accordingly, those suing foreign states and their instrumentalities, even where the instrumentality is a corporate body, need not undertake any additional ‘minimum contacts’ assessment to establish personal jurisdiction; meeting the FSIA’s own conditions is sufficient. The Court did not, however, decide the factual issue of whether the particular claims in this dispute come within the FSIA’s arbitration exceptions at the outset. The ruling bears on how courts construe the FSIA’s jurisdictional prerequisites as a matter of statutory interpretation...

For an at‑a‑glance, high‑level outline of the civil court structure and hierarchy in England and Wales, see: Courts and Tribunals Judiciary—Structure of Courts and Tribunals System. Several civil courts issue a court guide explaining how business in that court should be managed, which operates alongside, and in addition to, further guidance given in the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR). For further details, see Practice Note: Court guides and other guidance. For information on: claims that must be brought and issued in the County Court, see Practice Note: Starting civil claims in the County Court commencing a claim under CPR 8 (alternative procedure for claims where there is no substantial dispute of fact), see Practice Note: CPR Part 8 claims (alternative procedure for claims) High Court or the County Court? Whether proceedings ought to be issued in the High Court or the County Court is, in the main, determined by the claim’s value. This Practice Note addresses starting a claim under CPR 7. The...

This Practice Note outlines CE-File electronic working/electronic filing (also referred to as e-working/e-filing) in the courts under CPR PD 5C. CPR PD 5C applies from 1 October 2025—for guidance on CE-File before that date, see Practice Note: Electronic working and CE-File—when and where is CE-File applicable? [Archived]. It explains which courts use electronic working and the proceedings to which it applies. Read this Practice Note together with: How to use CE-File—from 1 October 2025—for guidance on using CE-File Electronic communication and filing of documents by email—CPR PD 5B—for guidance on electronic filing under CPR PD 5B Which courts use CE-File? The courts using CE-File are listed in CPR PD 5C, para 1.3 and include: the following Rolls Building jurisdictions at the Royal Courts of Justice in London (the Rolls Building Jurisdictions): the Chancery Division of the High Court the Commercial Court the Technology and Construction Court (TCC) the Circuit Commercial...

This Practice Note explores various alternative dispute resolution (ADR) options used in cross-border disputes. What is ADR? ADR denotes a collection of methods for resolving disagreements other than through the trial process. It offers a confidential means of settlement outside a court of law, whereby a dispute or difference is referred to an impartial individual or panel, either for determination or to help the parties achieve a negotiated resolution of their dispute. The process may lead to a binding outcome if the agreement by which the parties submit the dispute to ADR so provides. Note that the Commercial Court Guide and the Circuit Commercial Court Guide use the term negotiated dispute resolution (NDR), which can broadly be classified as either facilitated processes or imposed decisions. The two principal forms of ADR are arbitration and mediation. For insight into the range of ADR types available, see Practice Note: What is ADR? Arbitration The most consistently utilised ADR method in cross-border disputes is arbitration. This is a private form of...

Claim No. [ insert claim number ] In the High Court of Justice Business and Property Courts Of England and Wales or in [ insert location ] [ Specify division ] [ Specify specialist court ] [ Insert location ] District Registry The County Court at [ insert location ] Business and Property Courts List Before [ The Honourable Mr Justice OR The Honourable Mrs Justice OR His Honour Judge OR Her Honour Judge OR Master OR District Judge ] [ insert name ]; dated: [ insert date ]. Between: [ insert Claimant’s name ] (Claimant) and [ insert Defendant’s name ] (Defendant). [ Draft ] multi-track standard directions Warning: you must adhere to the obligations set out in this order; failure to do so may result in the claim being struck out or another sanction being imposed. If you are unable to comply, you should make a formal application to the court before...