Dispute board meaning

Oswin v Otila; and Ondray Claim No ARB 032/2025 What was the background? This matter arose from a falling-out between Oswin (the Claimant) and Ondray (the Second Defendant) over how to run their joint venture company, Otila (the First Defendant). Oswin owned 49% of the First Defendant’s shares and Ondray 51%. The board could act only by unanimous vote, while shareholder resolutions required a 75% super-majority. When they were unable to agree on management and operations, the company became deadlocked. Their relationship was governed by a Joint Venture Agreement (JVA) dated 12 March 2019, which included an arbitration clause calling for DIFC-seated proceedings under the DIFC-LCIA Rules. The Claimant also operated a medical and hazardous waste facility under an Operations and Management Agreement due to expire on 21 August 2025. On 15 August 2025, the Claimant issued a Dispute Notice under clause 21.2 of the JVA, alleging that the Second Defendant was assuming strategic decision-making without proper authority—covering directions on renewal of the O&M Agreement, instruction of external...

What was the background to the dispute? The arbitration stems from an actio ut singuli brought by Mr [J], a minority investor in Petrobras, against the União, seeking compensation for harm allegedly sustained by Petrobras after the appointment of board members reportedly linked to the Brazilian ‘Lava Jato’ corruption affair. Petrobras is a Brazilian mixed-economy entity engaged in the production, exploration, refining and sale of oil and gas. Its by-laws include an arbitration clause. On that footing, MUDES launched CAM arbitration proceedings in March 2017, and Mr [J] filed separate CAM proceedings in October 2017, both directed at the União. The União contested the clause’s applicability, denied being bound to arbitrate, and challenged the objective arbitrability of the case, invoking its public-law prerogatives. The two proceedings were consolidated in April 2018. On 15 January 2020, the arbitral tribunal issued an interim award confirming its jurisdiction. On 26 January 2023, the President of the Paris Judicial Court granted exequatur in France to the partial award...

PI & Clinical Negligence weekly highlights—24 July 2025 In this issue: Key PI and Clinical negligence developments Occupational disease Accidents abroad Other PI and Clinical negligence news LexTalk® PI & Clinical Negligence: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts LexisNexis® Webinars Useful information Key PI and Clinical negligence developments SI 2025/893 (Civil Procedure (Amendment No 2) Rules 2025) modifies the Civil Procedure Rules 1998, SI 1998/3132, revising Rule 2.8 (time) and Rule 5.5 (filing and sending documents) to reflect the roll-out of new Practice Direction 5C covering the CE-File electronic filing and case management system, following its piloting under Practice Direction 51O (electronic working pilot scheme). The changes come into force in part on 12 September 2025, and in full on 1 October 2025. Refer to LNB News 22/07/2025 19 for details. NHS Resolution publishes Annual Report and Accounts for 2024/25 NHS Resolution has issued its Annual Report and Accounts for 2024/25,...

As of 31 January 2020, the UK left the EU and the EEA. This Practice Note introduces: the General Data Protection Regulation, Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (EU GDPR) framework (which applied within UK law up to the end of the Brexit implementation period—11 pm UK time on 31 December 2020—and continues to operate across the EEA; therefore, any references in this Practice Note to EEA or EU states should be read as also covering the UK until that period concluded) the United Kingdom General Data Protection Regulation, Retained Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (UK GDPR) framework (which applies under UK law from the end of the Brexit implementation period) Where there is no need to draw a distinction, this Practice Note refers to both as ‘GDPR’ for ease. When looking at the routine processing of personal data, the UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA 2018) should be consulted together, as both sets of provisions have direct effect. Practitioners will generally...

This Practice Note explores how Dispute Avoidance/Adjudication Boards (DAABs) operate under the FIDIC Red, Yellow and Silver Books 2017. Each form requires disputes to be submitted to a DAAB, which then delivers a decision that binds the parties involved. Beyond formal determinations, a DAAB may provide informal guidance and support during the works, aiming to settle matters before they harden into disputes. The DAAB mechanism forms the opening tier in a multi-tier dispute resolution procedure. Where a party remains unhappy with a DAAB decision, it may move the matter to amicable settlement and, if necessary, to arbitration, as long as contractual time limits are observed. For further detail, please see Practice Note: FIDIC contracts 2017—dispute resolution. FIDIC’s practice notes on dispute boards FIDIC has issued three practice notes on dispute boards: Practice Note I—Dispute Avoidance—focused on dispute boards, released on 1 November 2023; Practice Note II—Appointment of Dispute Boards, published in December 2024; and Practice Note III—Dispute Board Decisions: Preparation and Composition, issued in December 2025. Practice Note...

Many family-run businesses often begin with a loosely defined governance set-up; relatives broadly recognise their responsibilities and how they relate to one another, and choices are taken swiftly around the kitchen table at home on a day-to-day basis. By their very nature, these enterprises tend to be informal and adaptable, with objectives shaped by doing what is best for the family in line with its values, rather than solely pursuing the owners’ profit or commercial gain. Yet, as the venture grows and more relatives and other employees come on board, managing the business in this manner becomes progressively harder as operations become more complex over time. This Practice Note examines, in particular, the advantages and disadvantages of formalising the family business, selecting a structure for a family business, and family charters. Formalising the family business—advantages and disadvantages The principal benefit of an informal set-up for a family business is flexibility. An informal structure enables family members to make swift decisions and gives them the...

[ NAME OF PROJECT ]: REFERENCE OF A DISPUTE TO THE DAAB UNDER CLAUSE 21.4 DAAB Reference No. DAAB Reference No. [ Number of reference ] | [ Date ] Referring Party [ Name of Party 1 ] [ Address ] [ Telephone/Fax No. ] [ Email address ] [ ON THE HEADED NOTEPAPER OF THE REFERRING PARTY ] Responding Party [ Name of Party 2 ] [ Address ] [ Telephone/Fax No. ] [ Email address ] The DAAB [ Name of DAAB Chairperson ] — [ Address ] — [ Telephone/Fax No. ] — [ Email address ] [ Name of DAAB Member 2 ] — [ Address ] — [ Telephone/Fax No. ] — [ Email address ] [ Name of DAAB Member 3 ] — [ Address ] — [ Telephone/Fax No. ] — [ Email address ] ...

(made pursuant to Part 26A of the Companies Act 2006) Between [ insert name of company ] and its Creditors/Members (as defined in the Restructuring Plan) Dated [ insert date ] 1 Definitions and Interpretation Within the Restructuring Plan, save where the context dictates otherwise or it is expressly stated to the contrary, the following terms shall bear these meanings: Act — refers to the Companies Act 2006 of Great Britain; Admissible Interest — means interest stipulated by a contract, any applicable statute, or other applicable law or judgement; Admitted Claim — the remaining balance, if any, owed by the Company to a Creditor/Member under clause 12.1, after applying set-off in accordance with clause 13.1; Agreed Claim — the sum assessed as payable by the Company in respect of a Creditor’s/Member’s Claim under clause 10; Available Distributable Amount — the amount available for payment by the Company to its Creditors/Members under clause 15; Board — the Company’s board of...

(pursuant to Part 26 of the Companies Act 2006 of Great Britain) Between [ insert name of company ] and its Scheme Creditors (as defined in the Scheme of Arrangement). Dated [ insert date ] 1 Definitions and Interpretation For the purposes of the Scheme, unless the context dictates otherwise or an express provision states differently, the following terms have these meanings: Act – refers to the Companies Act 2006 of Great Britain; Admissible Interest – denotes any interest provided for under a contract, any relevant statute, or any other applicable law or judgment; Admitted Claim – signifies the balance, if any, remaining due from the Company to a Scheme Creditor under clause 10.1 after applying set-off pursuant to clause 11.1; Agreed Claim – the amount determined as owed by the Company in respect of a Scheme Creditor’s Claim in accordance with clause 8; Available Distributable Amount – the sum available for payment by the Company to its Scheme Creditors...

Clare Ambrose, Twenty Essex The clear benefit is that the hearing can proceed and the dispute be determined, which is the tribunal’s fundamental objective. The tribunal’s obligation to be fair to both sides does not compel an in-person hearing; if suitable arrangements permit the hearing to happen, that will be a weighty factor in favour. There is also a possible gain in cost efficiency: although premium technology may incur expense, savings on hearing venues and travel and hotel accommodation could be substantial. Virtual hearings remain relatively novel, so practice is evolving to manage practicalities and logistics across the board. The range of technological solutions is broad and warrants careful review and thorough investigation by the parties involved. For the hearing to run smoothly, every participant in the arbitration should trial their equipment in the precise location from which their virtual hearing will (for each of them) be conducted...