Legal News

In this issue: Arbitration in England & Wales International Arbitration Investment treaty arbitration Institutional and ad hoc arbitration Other arbitration and ADR-related news and developments Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Useful information Arbitration in England & Wales Court infers a ‘horizontal’ arbitration agreement and orders a stay of proceedings Alrubie v Chelsea Football Club Ltd and another [2025] EWHC 541 ( Comm) concerned a successful bid by the second defendant to pause the court proceedings in the London Circuit Commercial Court. In the court claim, the claimant said the second defendant had procured the first defendant to breach a contract between the claimant and the first defendant. The claimant maintained that the agreement gave him a right to a commission connected to the transfer of a player from the first defendant, Chelsea Football Club Ltd ( Chelsea), to West Ham United Football Club ( West Ham). In allowing the stay, the court had to...

The awards were earlier scattered among various web sources and now are presented as a unified, web-based, complimentary compendium, hosted on CAM- CCBC’s website, freely for public access......

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,...

Ruling from a court in the Northern Mariana Islands US District Judge Frances M Tydingco- Gatewood removed John K Baldwin and his firm, Bridge Capital LLC, from the ongoing litigation. In her written judicial order, she explained that, under federal arbitration law, successful claimants may seek to confirm an award only against 'any other party to the arbitration' process. As the respondents were never participants in the arbitration proceedings, the court therefore cannot confirm the awards against them under the Federal Arbitration Act. The judge also expressly refused to determine whether Baldwin is the alter ego of the award debtors— Lao Holdings NV and Sanum Investments Ltd—companies he had established as part of the venture—stating that addressing that issue would be inappropriate in this kind of proceeding at this particular time......

My five specific observations: Benefits of AI : the Guideline adopts a firm view that AI is a boon to arbitration ( Part I). That matters because conversations about AI are too often anxiety-driven and focus solely on downsides and negatives alike. The Guideline gets it right, quite unequivocally, in fact. By way of illustration, it states that AI can materially improve the arbitral workflow in both efficiency and quality. Both points hold. From our own data after creating a dispute resolution AI system at www.aavalynx.ai, we see efficiency uplifts of up to 70%, alongside better quality, as AI avoids overlooking key evidence and proactively flags any gaps in the record Risks of AI : Part I of the Guideline likewise addresses the hazards of deploying AI. Here, the vital question is: which risks are novel to, or notably magnified by, AI, and which long...

In this issue: Arbitration in England & Wales International Arbitration Institutional and ad hoc arbitration Lex Talk®Arbitration: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Useful information Arbitration in England & Wales OFSI issues General Licence allowing payments to be made to Arbitration Associations and Arbitrators to cover arbitration fees The Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation ( OFSI) has released General Licence INT/2025/5787748, issued under Regulation 64 of the Russia ( Sanctions) ( EU Exit) Regulations 2019 ( SI 2019/855) and Regulation 32 of the Republic of Belarus ( Sanctions) ( EU Exit) Regulations 2019 ( SI 2019/600). The licence authorises payments to Arbitration Associations and Arbitrators to meet fees and expenses arising from arbitral services. It further allows payments to a designated person’s representative, or legal...

Cargill Financial Services International, Inc, et al v Taras Barchchovskiy 24-cv-5751 ( LJL) What are the practical implications of this case? This matter concerned an application in a US court to recognise a judgment of the English Commercial Court that upheld an LCIA arbitral award. Applying New York law, the court confirmed that a New York court does not need to establish personal jurisdiction over the judgment debtor merely to recognise a foreign judgment; it is sufficient that the foreign court possessed personal jurisdiction over that debtor. The court drew a firm line between recognition—a mainly ministerial step—and enforcement, which does require the establishment of personal jurisdiction over the debtor or their assets. Recognition is pivotal because, without it, a foreign judgment is ‘a meaningless piece of paper, enforceable only within the borders of the jurisdiction of the court that rendered it’. See Cargill Fin Servs...

In this issue: Arbitration in England & Wales International Arbitration Investment treaty arbitration Institutional and ad hoc arbitration Other arbitration and ADR-related news and developments Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Useful information Arbitration in England & Wales Foreign judgments, the State Immunity Act 1978 and issue estoppel In Hulley Enterprises Ltd v The Russian Federation [2025] EWCA Civ 108, the English Court of Appeal ruled that the Netherlands courts’ conclusion that Russia had given written consent to arbitrate this dispute gave rise to an issue estoppel. As the foreign judgment established the written agreement to arbitrate, the exception in section 9 of the State Immunity Act 1978 was engaged. See News Analysis: Foreign judgments, the State Immunity Act 1978 and issue estoppel ( Hulley & Others v The Russian Federation) written by Jennifer...

Kumpers Composites Gmb H v TPI Composites CV-23-00214- PHX- SMB What are the practical implications of this case? At its heart, the dispute concerned whether and how the CISG applied, how it should be construed, and whether specific provisions could be contracted out of. As a preliminary step, the court addressed CISG applicability. The agreement chose Arizona law to govern and expressly disapplied any conflict-of-laws rules. Relying on leading US CISG authorities, the court stated that, by virtue of the US Constitution’s Supremacy Clause, the CISG overrides state law, so a choice of Arizona law necessarily encompassed the CISG. It added that excluding choice-of-law rules did not dislodge the CISG’s operation. Because the CISG is substantive in character, this approach accords with recent German decisions on the point... Two further points centred on the integration clause and the...

General Dynamics United Kingdom Ltd v The State of Libya [2025] EWCA Civ 134 What are the practical implications of this case? This judgment clarifies the bar for waiving execution immunity under the SIA. It is of particular importance to those contracting with sovereigns or state‑owned bodies, as it confirms that broadly worded commitments to the enforceability of an arbitral award can amount to a waiver of execution immunity, even without an explicit mention of the SIA. General formulations acknowledging that an award will be enforceable may suffice to displace execution immunity. Careful drafting remains essential so the enforcement position is unmistakable. Practitioners advising on the drafting of arbitration agreements involving state counterparties should ensure the wording used captures the parties’ intentions on enforcement......

Robert Cook told delegates at the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association’s annual Compliance & Legal Seminar that arbitration attracts the most focus in rule submissions because it demands ongoing updates. There are numerous angles to scrutinise with arbitration, and, as part of the rule modernisation initiative, we are willing to address it in earnest, Cook noted. My team won’t thank me for saying this, but at times I think arbitration—perhaps it should be handled by another body. He went on: people tend to presume that if we administer it, the industry is in charge—aside from the industry, which argues it is not. So it becomes a perpetual ‘nobody’s satisfied’ situation, raising the question of whether this is even something we ought to be administering. He observed that the US Securities and Exchange Commission, and others, have acknowledged that FINRA’s oversight of...

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...

Roadpost Inc v Beam Communications Pty Ltd [2025] FCA 120 What are the practical implications of this case? The principal takeaway for practitioners is that, when pursuing enforcement of an arbitral award that includes specific performance, avoid presenting it purely as declaratory relief; a court may regard an order in that guise as serving no real purpose at all in practice. For arbitrators, a cautious approach in drafting is to set out declarations in paragraphs distinct from operative orders, thereby making any subsequent enforcement materially more straightforward. What was the background?......

The duty of the expert witness The litigation process is usually regulated by strict procedural rules in each jurisdiction, which often outline an expert’s role and obligations. In England, for example, experts are addressed in the Civil Procedure Rules, Part 35 ( CPR 35). These provisions set out, among other things, how experts are appointed, the expert’s duty, and the required structure and substance of an expert report. CPR 35 further requires the expert to include in his or her report a statement confirming independence. It makes clear that an expert’s role is to assist the court on matters within their expertise, and that this paramount duty takes precedence over any duty owed to the instructor or the party funding the engagement. By contrast, in arbitration there is generally no specific regulatory framework for experts within most institutional procedure rules. The rulebooks of the...

Our thanks go to the following contributors for offering their insights on this significant topic. Jesse Sherrett, Partner, Sterlington, New York Luis Perez, Chair, Latin America and the Caribbean Practice, Akerman, Miami Jonathan Morton, Counsel, Haynes & Boone, London Andreas Dracoulis, Partner, Haynes & Boone, London Jonathan Waisnor, Partner, Labaton Keller Sucharow LLP, New York Peter Rosher, Partner and Global Chair, International Arbitration, Reed Smith, Paris Jovana Crncevic, Special Counsel, Withers, New York Alex Haden, Senior Associate, Withers, New York Wade Corriell, Partner, King & Spalding, Singapore and Houston Mealey’s: What do you believe will be the major challenges for arbitration in 2025? Sherett: Across the West, 2024 proved difficult for sitting governments. In the US, the UK, France and Germany, opposition parties either returned to office with emphatic wins or left ruling parties...

India v CCDM Holdings [2025] FCAFC 2) What was the background? Three Mauritian entities secured a 2020 PCA award obliging the Republic of India to pay compensation for breaches of the India- Mauritius BIT (the Quantum Award) after the Indian Government cancelled an agreement between Devas India and Antrix Corporation Ltd, a state-owned Indian company (the Devas/ Antrix Agreement). The rights of those companies were assigned to three successors (the Applicants), who sought recognition and enforcement of the Quantum Award in the Federal Court of Australia (the Application). The Republic of India resisted the Application, invoking sovereign immunity under Part II of the Foreign States Immunities Act 1985 ( Cth) (the FSI Act). Under the FSI Act, a foreign state is not subject to the jurisdiction of Australian courts unless (a) it has submitted to the jurisdiction of the Australian court in the...

BV v Basrah Oil Company 200.323.800/01 200.323.800/01 What are the practical implications of this case? The practical implications of this case are twofold. It confirms that, in enforcement proceedings, a defendant may lodge a counter-application for leave to enforce an arbitral award arising from the same arbitration. That is what Basrah Oil did in respect of the award it had obtained against the Claimant. The Claimant opposed this on procedural grounds, asserting that placing the request within Basrah Oil’s response to the Claimant’s own application for leave breached principles of due process. The Amsterdam Court of Appeal addressed these concerns by arranging an additional hearing so the Claimant could properly answer the counter-application, and dismissed the remainder of the objections. More importantly, the Amsterdam Court of Appeal confined the leave to enforce to the net figure: the amount awarded to the Claimant under a final...

Komaksavia Airport Invest Ltd v Republic of Moldova, Case No T 13314-22 What are the practical implications of this case? Investment disputes under bilateral treaties differ because there is no straightforward contract binding the investor and the host State; there is no direct contractual tie. Under such treaties, an arbitration pact crystallises only once the investor takes up the State’s standing offer to arbitrate by lodging a request for arbitration. Consequently, whether the would‑be claimant has made an ‘investment’ goes first and foremost to the State’s consent to arbitrate, rather than to the question of whether the dispute sits within the scope of the arbitration agreement. What was the background? The controversy stemmed from Komaksavia’s purchase of a 95% interest in a Moldovan company that had concluded a concession with the Moldovan authorities to develop and run Chisinau Airport under that...

On 19 March 2025, US District Judge Richard J Leon issued a minute order, noting there was 'good precedent' for not compelling a solvent sovereign state to lodge a bond in matters like this. Judge Leon explained he weighed three factors in deciding to dispense with the bond. First, the size of the damages award; second, the entity’s net worth measured against those damages; and third, that party’s residency status. He further observed that India’s 'status as a sovereign is relevant and the appropriate proxy for an individual's residency status'. These were the points he had to assess to reach the decision to forgo a bond in this case......

Spineway SA v Strategos Group LLC, No 24-1584, 3rd Circuit, 2025 US Court of Appeals — ruling issued 18 March 2025 Medical devices In 2019, Spineway SA, a France-based manufacturer of medical devices, formed a joint venture with Strategos Group LLC, a Delaware investment outfit specialising in healthcare ventures in Latin America. Their contract included an arbitration clause stating that disputes would be determined under the ‘ Mediation and Arbitration Rules of the Geneva International Chamber of Commerce’, before a single arbitrator seated in Geneva, with French law governing the process. After conflicts emerged and Spineway moved to begin arbitration, it realised that the ‘ Geneva International Chamber of Commerce’ does not exist. As a result, it submitted an arbitration claim to the Swiss Chambers’ Arbitration Institution ( SCAI). Strategos received notice of the arbitration but chose not to...