the arbitration agreement meaning

When considering an arbitration, you should consider: how the dispute will be financed and managed overall can the client realistically cover your professional fees together with the arbitration expenses? could another party or source be prepared to pick up the entire bill? is any relevant insurance already in place and available? would after-the-event insurance cover be an appropriate option? might your firm accept a conditional fee arrangement, a damages-based agreement, or some other funding structure? See Funding Arrangements—Overview (note: this link is not arbitration-specific) is the client open to exploring third-party funding? ...

ARCHIVED: This Checklist has been archived and is no longer maintained. For up-to-date guidance, please refer to: Governing law and jurisdiction clauses in commercial contracts―checklist. Brexit: As of exit day (11pm on 31 January 2020) the UK is no longer an EU Member State. However, in line with the Withdrawal Agreement, the UK entered an implementation period, during which it continues to be subject to EU law. This affects this Checklist. For further guidance, see Brexit Bulletin—key updates, research tips and resources, and the Brexit collection. This Checklist assesses the implications of Brexit for drafting and negotiating dispute resolution clauses. It looks at the position regarding: Applicable law clauses (also referred to as governing law clauses or choice of law clauses) Jurisdiction clauses The enforcement of judgments The service of documents...

This Checklist To be read together with the Practice Note entitled Arbitration and the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999. It highlights key matters to assess when deciding whether arbitration clauses within contracts also bind a third party under the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 (C(RTP)A 1999): Does the relevant contract expressly disapply the C(RTP)A? Many commercial agreements expressly exclude the C(RTP)A 1999 Is the contract expressly subject to English law? If English law does not govern, then the C(RTP)A 1999 may not apply to the contract If the contract is not governed by English law, but the arbitration clause is, the C(RTP)A 1999 may nevertheless apply to the arbitration agreement (see eg AES Ust-Kamenogorsk Hydropower Plant LLP v Ust-Kamenogorsk Hydropower Plant JSC) Also, check the date of the contract...

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...

Alrubie v Chelsea Football Club Ltd and another [2025] EWHC 541 (Comm) What are the practical implications of this case? This decision will particularly interest arbitration practitioners and professionals working in sports clubs, and could equally concern other organisations whose members are controlled by association rules. Commonly, those participating in professional sports clubs accept, by reason of their membership, that they are bound by the club’s rulebook and by the regulations of any national and worldwide governing bodies. Such regimes routinely incorporate arbitration agreements, owing in part to the confidentiality of arbitral proceedings, which protects against undesirable public attention, and in part to the ability to appoint arbitrators with specialist knowledge of the sport’s rules and industry practices. The case clarifies that these rules may have ‘horizontal’ contractual effect between members, as well as ‘vertical’ effect between each member and the governing body, notwithstanding the absence of any express bilateral agreement between members. It underlines how membership-based governance can, through the acceptance of rulebooks, generate binding obligations that...

DMZ v DNA [2025] SGHC 31 What are the practical implications of this case? Administrative acts by arbitral bodies can be susceptible to review where neither the institution’s rules, the lex arbitri, nor the arbitration agreement expressly or implicitly bar it. Such decisions must be taken lawfully, with respect for procedural fairness, the institution’s own rules, the applicable lex arbitri and the contractual terms governing the arbitration. Where an institution issues an administrative ruling that carries no right of appeal or review, a party aggrieved by that outcome ought to invite the institution to revisit its position under an express, or an implied, power to reconsider (paras [40]–[45]). Any court challenge is unlikely to succeed if the unhappy party failed first to request reconsideration by the institution. Instead of mounting a direct challenge where the rules foreclose one, parties may allow the decision to remain in place and seek measures to neutralise its consequences. Here, the court determined that the sole permissible route to contest the decision was to...

For many years, virtually every disagreement about agricultural tenancies was sent to arbitration at the outset. The rationale was that questions concerning agricultural holdings often have a strong practical dimension, so arbitration was thought a more suitable forum than the courts. This reflected the earlier assumption that practical considerations predominated in such cases, making a court reference less apt back then. Over time, however, matters of considerable legal intricacy also came before arbitrators. With the enactment of the Agricultural Holdings (Scotland) Act 2003 (AH(S)A 2003), policy shifted, and the main route for resolving disputes about agricultural tenant issues is now referral to the Scottish Land Court. At the same time, arbitration procedures were streamlined, and alternative processes, eg mediation, were enabled. Although the Agricultural Holdings (Scotland) Act 1991 (AH(S)A 1991) still sets out distinct mechanisms for dispute resolution, AH(S)A 2003 has substantially reshaped them, so that the arrangements for resolving disputes under 1991 Act Tenancies are, in large part, aligned with those for 2003 Act Tenancies...

This Practice Note sets out guidance on arbitral awards in proceedings under the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC) Administered Arbitration Rules 2018 (2018 HKIAC Rules; HKIAC 2018). As explained in Practice Note: HKIAC (2018)—the HKIAC Administered Arbitration Rules—application and key features, the 2018 HKIAC Rules generally govern HKIAC arbitrations commenced on or after 1 November 2018, save where the parties agree otherwise; for HKIAC arbitrations begun before 1 November 2018, the 2013 HKIAC Rules will generally apply unless the parties agreed otherwise. For an overview of the HKIAC and how it is organised, see Practice Note: HKIAC—background to and structure of the institution. Awards in HKIAC arbitrations In line with most institutional regimes, under the 2018 HKIAC Rules a tribunal may render interim, interlocutory, or partial awards and, in addition to a final award, may issue interim awards as to costs (HKIAC 2018, art 35.1). Where the tribunal has more than one arbitrator, any award or other ruling is to be made by a majority. Failing a...

The Swiss Rules of International Arbitration, updated on 1 June 2021 (the Swiss Rules), apply—unless the parties agree otherwise—to any arbitration begun on or after 1 June 2021 under an arbitration agreement referring either to the Swiss Rules or to the prior rules of chambers or organisations that joined the Swiss Rules or brought their proceedings within them. This Practice Note examines the appointment of the arbitral tribunal under the Swiss Rules. The provisions regulating constitution of the tribunal are, for the most part, consistent with those in most other widely used arbitration rules, though there are a handful of particularities. For guidance on the 2012 Swiss Rules, see: Swiss Rules arbitration—overview. This note highlights similarities and specific features when constituting tribunals, within the context of these Swiss Rules and notes areas of difference. Number of arbitrators Under the Swiss Rules, the parties may decide the size of the arbitral tribunal, either within their arbitration clause or subsequently. While that choice rests with the parties, the Arbitration Court...

This Agreement is dated [ date ] Parties [ insert name of the pursuer ], a company registered in Scotland (no [ insert company number ]), whose [ registered office OR principal place of business ] is at [ insert address ] (the Pursuer) [ and ] [ ; ] [ insert name of defender ], a company registered in Scotland (no [ insert company number ]), whose [ registered office OR principal place of business ] is at [ insert address ] (the Defender). Each being a Party and, together, the Parties. Whereas (A) [ Insert details of the background to the dispute eg ‘The Parties entered into a contract for the supply of certain goods etc ]. (B) A dispute has emerged between the Parties regarding [ insert details of the dispute ] (the Dispute). (C) [ Proceedings were raised by the Pursuer against the Defender on [ date ] by way of [ Summons OR...

The Contract comprises the completed Standard Building Contract Without Quantities for use in Scotland 2016 published by the SBCC subject to the following amendments: Recitals and Articles updated: contractor to provide a master programme and Schedule of Information Requirements; CDP responsibility accepted; Principal Contractor duties priced; arbitration deleted; Schedule of Amendments prevails; Third Party Agreements duties. Contract Particulars: arbitration entries removed; Rectification Period set at 12 months; fluctuations and certain PII/guarantee entries deleted. Conditions: key definitions revised (Practical Completion, Copyright Material, Design sub‑contractors, Funder, Site); Scottish jurisdiction; approvals mean principles only; entire agreement; variations in writing. Design/materials/programming: contractor accepts ER/CP; quality and non‑deleterious materials; programme reporting; site risk; drawings/info supply; tighter discrepancy notices. Time/defects: mitigate and advise on delay; narrower Relevant Events; Practical Completion clarified; stronger rectification, consequential damage and indemnity; phased as‑built/occupation information. IP/confidentiality/BIM: broader licence, moral rights waivers and delivery; confidentiality reinforced; BIM where adopted. Management/sub‑contracting: access, approved Site Manager, meetings; prescribed sub‑contracts; collateral warranties/third‑party rights; CDM duties; insurance...

This Agreement dates from [ insert day ] of [ insert month ] 20[ insert year ] Parties 1 [ Insert full name and address of individual or company name, number and address of registered office ] ( Party A ) 2 [ Insert full name and address of individual or company name, number and address of registered office ] ( Party B ) each a ‘Party’ and jointly the ‘Parties’ The Parties agree: 1 Definitions and interpretation Dispute • denotes any claim stemming from or relating directly to [ Insert description of the dispute/circumstances giving rise to the dispute ]. Proceedings • signifies any court proceedings within England and Wales, plus also any arbitration concerning the Dispute. Period of Extension • denotes the duration that starts on the date of this Agreement and runs until it is ended in accordance with clause 3. Extension Date • signifies the date upon which the Period...