Featured documents
R (Greyhound Board of Great Britain Ltd) v Welsh Ministers [2026] EWHC 670 (Admin) What are the practical implications of this case? The ruling reinforces the constitutional divide between the courts and the legislature. It explains that the scheme and framework of the Government of Wales Act 2006 (GWA 2006) embody that separation of powers, and that any judicial attempt to recognise and enforce a common law obligation on Welsh Ministers to consult prior to introducing legislation in the Senedd would trespass upon that boundary. This is not a departure from established principle; case law has already upheld comparable rules for lawmakers in Scotland and at Westminster. However, this is the first express confirmation of the position for Welsh lawmakers, and the first time this dimension of the GWA 2006 has been analysed in such depth. The court examined earlier
The solution arrived through the United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC), a quasi‑judicial body handling mass claims, created under UN Security Council Resolution 687. By addressing environmental harm—most notably via its ‘F4’ claim class—the UNCC set a seminal benchmark shaping how international law and contemporary arbitral panels allocate financial responsibility for wartime ecological devastation. With present-day wars in areas such as Eastern Europe and the Middle East bringing dam breaches, strikes on chemical facilities, and the burning of farmland, the UNCC’s legacy endures as an essential reference point for states, global investors, and companies engaged in post‑conflict arbitration. The F4 claims: Quantifying the unquantifiable Prior to the 1990s, mechanisms in international law for war reparations overwhelmingly favoured property loss, foregone earnings, and bodily injury. The natural world was commonly treated as a mute, non-compensable victim of armed hostilities...
Understanding the farming business as a business Many farms still use long-standing structures that arose by habit, not strategy. Sole traders, informal partnerships and outdated partnership deeds are common. While once effective, such setups can cause major issues around succession, tax planning and involving the next generation. A corporate team can take a fresh, business-led view of the farm, asking: Who owns the land and other critical assets? Who manages daily operations? Who carries the risk and who enjoys the return? What is the enduring plan for succession? From this review, the team can confirm whether the current setup is fit for purpose or if an alternative — for example an updated partnership agreement, a company, a limited liability partnership, or a blended model — would better meet the family’s aims. Tax efficiency through joined-up advice Tax sits at the centre of most
Most recent News
Early Production of Evidence (‘ EPE’) Early Production of Evidence (‘ EPE’) enables parties to seek the disclosure of evidence from an appointed arbitrator—commonly termed the ‘evidence arbitrator’—through a distinct, self-contained procedure. Effective dispute management depends on identifying the facts that must be proved and assessing the evidence available. As a result, EPE operates as a dispute-prevention measure, fostering settlements and allowing parties to evaluate the viability of their claims before commencing arbitration. This mechanism is vital for scrutinising a case prior to advancing a full claim to an Arbitral Tribunal. Recognised under Brazilian procedural law, EPE is underpinned by the 2015 Brazilian Code of Civil Procedure ( CPC), which authorises its application in specified situations, including circumstances where advance clarification of facts may justify or avoid litigation......
Oil Basins Ltd vs Esso Australia Resources Pty Ltd [2025] VSC 34 What are the practical implications of this case? This case examines the compulsory operation of section 7 of the International Arbitration Act 1974 ( Cth) ( IAA 1974). Where an arbitration agreement exists and the proceedings concern a matter capable of resolution by arbitration, a court is obliged to stay the court proceeding and refer the dispute to arbitration. Arbitration practitioners generally acknowledge the mandatory character of s 7 and recognise that, unless a court concludes the arbitration agreement is null and void, inoperative, or incapable of being performed, the court must stay the court proceeding and send the matter to arbitration. Nevertheless, an exception to this otherwise strict obligation has been recognised overseas and, in Australia, within the domestic arbitration context. Under that exception, a court may decide a challenge to the...
The history of arbitration laws in Peru can be divided in three stages. The earliest phase dates back to the mid-sixteenth century, when Peru remained within the Spanish Empire. Norms on arbitration were limited, yet the Recopilación de Leyes de las Indias required that arbitral decisions be carried out in accordance with the law, and the Spanish Constitution of 1812 acknowledged the possibility of resolving disputes by arbitration. The second phase opened with Peru’s independence and displayed clear resistance to arbitration. The 1823 Constitution declared that only constitutionally created courts were accepted, and that no proceedings other than the ordinary process set by law would be valid. Thereafter, arbitration received a cautious nod, treated essentially as a stiff, highly formal judicial mechanism. The third phase arose in the 1990s, as Peru moved to update its framework and rejoin global markets after a...
Background to the 2025 Act which amends the Arbitration Act 1996 The Arbitration Act 1996 (the AA 1996) has played a central role in the growth of arbitrations seated in London. More contracts now select London as the seat, bringing notable gains to bodies such as the London Court of International Arbitration ( LCIA). By simplifying the resolution of commercial disputes, the AA 1996 has strengthened London’s international appeal. In 2022, the Law Commission of England and Wales launched a review and consultation of the AA 1996 to modernise it and safeguard London’s standing as a leading global centre for commercial arbitration. Its Recommendations, published in September 2023, found that the AA 1996 remains effective, while justifying targeted refinements ( Summary of Recommendations at 1.22) ( Law Commission Documents Template). The Conservative government accepted those proposals and introduced a Bill to the House of Lords on 21...
Baker Hughes Saudi Arabia Company Ltd v Dynamic Industries, Incorporated & others Case 23-30827, US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit What are the practical implications of this case? Central to the dispute is whether choosing a set of arbitral rules in an arbitration clause should be read as selecting a forum when no venue is expressly named. The Second, Fourth, and Eleventh Circuits have concluded that picking rules signals forum selection, invoking the canon expressio unius est exclusio alterius, whereas the Ninth Circuit has, without deciding the point, questioned that premise. The Fifth Circuit, likewise, declined to resolve the matter and voiced comparable reservations. Consequently, the court suggested that a split among circuits may ultimately crystallise if a circuit court squarely determines that adopting arbitral rules does not amount to choosing a forum. Turning to the discontinued DIFC- LCIA regime, the court noted that...
Etrak v Libya, 2025 US Dist LEXIS 19756 ( D. D. C. 2025), Case No 22-cv-864 ( JMC) What are the practical implications of this case? In a New York Convention confirmation action brought in a US court, a state cannot evade recognition or enforcement of an unfavourable arbitral award by relying on: (i) an adverse ruling from its own courts issued after the arbitration commenced—even if that court case was filed earlier—because res judicata does not bite; or (ii) the existence of parallel confirmation proceedings in other jurisdictions. Interpreting the Convention strictly, the court explained that a stay of enforcement is permissible only where an application to set aside or suspend the award is before a competent authority in the country of the seat or the law governing the award—here, Switzerland. Libya had previously submitted such a bid to the Swiss courts and lost, and...
Hunt v IPS Law LLP and Others (transcript) [2024] EWHC 3395 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? This judgment is a pointed reminder of the limits of AA 1996, s 9. That provision permits a party to an arbitration agreement, when sued in court on a matter agreed to be referred to arbitration, to seek a stay of the proceedings. In this dispute, however, the correct interpretation of the Investment Agreement meant the defendants were not parties to the arbitration clause at all, so a stay was unavailable. IPS Law, although described in the agreement as the ‘ Investment Escrow Party’, did not fall within the clause’s references to the ‘ Parties’. Nor could IPS Law invoke the clause via C( RTP) A 1999, because the Investment Agreement did not confer any benefit on it....
Global Voice Group SA v Republic of Guinea No 22-2100, D DC, 2025 US Dist LEXIS 28564 Telecommunications contract In May 2009, Global Voice Group SA ( GVG) concluded a partnership to furnish Guinea with tools to monitor and levy taxes on international telecommunications traffic. The agreement identified GVG and the Postal and Telecommunications Regulatory Authority of Guinea ( PTRA) as the contracting parties and included an arbitration clause. A dispute followed concerning GVG’s claim for payment of US$103,171,862.66 said to be due under the contract. In December 2016, GVG commenced ICC arbitration in Paris against both PTRA and Guinea. On 18 July 2019, the tribunal awarded GVG in excess of US$21m in damages and fees. Guinea and PTRA challenged the award in the French courts, but in September 2021 the Paris Court of Appeal affirmed it. On 18 July 2022, GVG filed in the...
In this issue: Arbitration under the AA 1996 Act 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 under the AA 1996 Act A successful challenge under section 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996 In Djanogly v Djanogly [2025] EWHC 61 ( Ch), the court set aside an arbitral award under section 68(2) because the tribunal failed to grapple with a limitation defence advanced by the claimant. Had that argument been considered, a result advantageous to the claimant might have followed. The court concluded that Jewish law is not the law of ‘any other country’, and so it cannot displace English limitation rules. By reason of section 13 of the Arbitration Act 1996, the Limitation Acts govern...
Three Crowns & Stanford’s Code X build a AI trial training tool According to Three Crowns and Code X, the system harnesses large language models, or LLMs, to assess cross-examination performances and deliver immediate guidance to advocates. The application remains at the prototype phase. On 18 February 2025, Hugh Carlson, chief executive of Three Crowns, told Law360 Pulse the firm intends to deploy the platform to bolster its current training programme......
Wuhu Ruyi Xinbo Investment Partnership ( Ltd Partnership) v Shandong Ruyi Technology Group Co, Ltd and another [2024] SGHC 308 What are the practical implications of this case? The Singapore High Court has affirmed its full case management powers when asked to enforce a New York Convention award. Article III provides that each Contracting State must recognise arbitral awards as binding and enforce them in accordance with the procedural rules of the forum, thereby subjecting the enforcement of a Convention award to the procedural law of the enforcing State. The High Court held—consistent with the English High Court’s ruling in Diag Human SE v Czech Republic [2014] 1 All ER ( Comm) 605—that this extends to the court’s ability to impose sanctions, including the dismissal of the proceedings themselves. The decision underscores that applications for recognition and enforcement are managed under local...
Djanogly v Djanogly, BL-2022-001413 What are the practical implications of this case? Challenges under AA 1996, s 68 seldom succeed; applicants face a steep threshold ( K v P [2019] EWHC 589 ( Comm)). Relief under s 68(2)(d) arises only where the tribunal has failed to tackle an issue that is significant or fundamental to the dispute (see paras [111]–[115]). That said, arbitrators must be careful to engage with every important point. Parties and tribunals handling claims pursued under laws that are not the laws of another country should remain alert to the application of the 1980. What was the background? One respondent, DD, sought maintenance from his sons, SD and AD, under Jewish law. The matter was first considered informally, leading to a Psak Din issued by a judge of the Beth Din of the Federation of Synagogues. When this failed to settle matters, AD and DD...
Mare Nova Inc v Zhangjiagang Jiushun Ship Engineering Co Ltd [2025] EWHC 223 ( Comm) What are the practical implications of this case? This decision serves as a caution to arbitrators against introducing issues not advanced by the parties; if they do, they must invite submissions on the new point. While section 68 challenges rarely prevail, denying parties the chance to make representations on a material issue, or the converse—failing to engage with a significant point put by the parties (see Djanogly v Djanogly)—can lead to the award being set aside. What was the background? The claimant shipowner commenced arbitration against the defendant shipyard, seeking damages for breach of contract and negligence, together with sums alleged due under a contractual guarantee, arising out of repair works undertaken by the shipyard......
US District Judge Beryl A Howell – 11 February 2025 minute order In a minute order dated 11 February 2025, US District Judge Beryl A Howell indicated that, while the Kingdom of Spain pursues a petition for a writ of certiorari, it has provided little basis to think the justices will consider whether Spain agreed to arbitrate investor disputes under the Energy Charter Treaty. Judge Howell underscored the DC Circuit’s 2 December 2024 refusal of Spain’s bid for rehearing en banc in litigation brought by renewable energy investors seeking to enforce some US$377m in arbitral awards against Spain arising from set aside economic incentives. The appellate court also declined to revisit its earlier summer ruling that the awards are subject to enforcement......
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 UK Parliament signs off Arbitration Bill with no changes, awaiting Royal Assent Parliament has wrapped up its scrutiny of the Arbitration Bill. The Committee of the whole House of Commons examined the measure and opted for no amendments. It then proceeded to a third reading, passing through unchanged. The Arbitration Bill now awaits Royal Assent. See: LNB News 12/02/2025 46......
In a report released on 6 February 2025, the Magic Circle firm set out ways to deploy AI in arbitration, spanning legal research, document review, drafting, and summarising, plus argument comparison, predictive analytics, transcription, and case management. Natalia Zibibbo, a lawyer at the firm, noted that AI-driven platforms are appearing that could transform legal workflows, and that, when applied thoughtfully, such tools can markedly boost efficiency in arbitration, delivering time and cost-saving gains that both arbitrators and counsel are keen to harness. At the same time, Freshfields urged restraint regarding security and transparency, calling for stronger oversight following the rise of generative AI and large language models, so as to head off risks such as hallucinations — AI presenting invented authorities and legal reasoning as facts......
Mobile Telecommunications Company KSCP v HRH Prince Hussam [2025] EWHC 85 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? This dispute examined the jurisdictional bases available for a creditor’s bankruptcy petition under the Insolvency Act 1986, and in particular those contained in section 265 of that Act. The initial limb, concerning the debtor’s centre of main interests, was not applicable in this instance. Attention therefore shifted to the second limb in section 265: whether, during the three years leading up to the petition date (the relevant period), the debtor maintained a place of residence within the jurisdiction. Drawing together various and disparate strands from earlier authorities, the court expressly set out at [148] a clear and authoritative five-part framework that defines the quality and degree of occupation required to found jurisdiction in this context: first, the...
Rus Chem Alliance LLC v Bayerische Landesbank What are the practical implications of this case? This ruling carries two notable practical consequences: It closely echoes an earlier judgment of the same court in a claim against Unicredit Bank Gmb H, thereby strengthening the Russian courts’ stance that any Russian party to an arbitration clause may unilaterally choose the jurisdiction of the Russian courts in any sanctions‑related dispute, on the basis that sanctions, by their nature, hinder a Russian party’s access to justice. In effect, more Russian parties are likely to bypass arbitration provisions and opt for Russian court proceedings, to the detriment of foreign counterparties. It further confirms that Russian courts will readily set aside an arbitration agreement with a non‑ Russian seat, will assume jurisdiction over disputes involving foreign parties, and will identify a rationale to apply Russian substantive law even where the parties have not...
Professor Emilia Onyema set the tone at the outset with an eloquent address that clearly spotlighted the SADRC’s purpose of promoting understanding of IDR practice in underrepresented jurisdictions. Following a successful 2023 webinar centred on IDR in Jordan and Iran, attention now turns decisively to Algeria and Libya. Chaired by Noor Al Rayes, the gathering assembled a highly notable panel of legal academics and experienced practitioners, whose contributions unpacked the complex character of arbitration across the North African landscape. Dr Amel Makhlouf delivered a careful examination of Algeria’s arbitral framework, noting that Algerian arbitration legislation draws in substance on French and Swiss law rather than the UNCITRAL Model Law. She observed that the seats most frequently selected by Algerian parties are Paris and Geneva, with proceedings most often conducted in French and, to a lesser degree, English. Dr......
In this issue: Arbitration in England & Wales Arbitration under the Arbitration Act 1996 International Arbitration Institutional and ad hoc arbitration Other arbitration and ADR-related news and developments New and updated content Useful information Lex Talk®Arbitration: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts Arbitration in England & Wales Arbitration Bill [ HL] moves to committee after second reading The UK Parliament has advanced the Arbitration Bill [ HL] to the next step in the legislative journey. Following its second reading debate on 29 January 2025, the Bill was referred to a Committee of the whole House and is due for examination on 11 February 2025. See: LNB News 31/01/2025 17. Arbitration under the Arbitration Act 1996 English Court underscores the demanding bar for section 68 bids to undo awards Collins v Wind Energy Holding Ltd [2025] EWHC 40 ( Comm) stems from an...
Popular documents
When evaluating a general damages claim, the practitioner ought initially to refer to the Judicial College Guidelines (JCG)...
This Practice Note This Practice Note reviews mechanisms used in settling litigation. A Tomlin order consists of a consent order paired with a schedule. It operates to stay proceedings on terms that have been agreed. The provisions contained in the schedule may remain confidential. This Practice Note describes the scope of confidentiality attaching to the schedule and sets out how it differs from a standard consent order. Sample wording for a Tomlin order is included, alongside links to precedents, as well as guidance on court approval. It also addresses varying, setting aside and enforcing a Tomlin order, including the considerations the court will take into account when handling applications for each. Further guidance is provided on interpreting and applying the relevant provisions of the CPR; however, some courts and divisions impose very specific requirements for both drafting and approval, and for approaching the schedule and confidentiality issues. Accordingly, you must consider the particular rules and court guide provisions in the forum where your claim is proceeding when drawing up the Tomlin order...
Date [ date ] Parties [ name of Landlord ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Landlord) [ name of Tenant ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Tenant) [ [ name of Guarantor ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Guarantor) ] [ [ name of Mortgagee ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Mortgagee) ] Definitions Within this Deed, the terms below shall be interpreted as follows: [ Annual Rent • the annual sum reserved under the Lease; ] [ Insurance Rent • the Tenant’s share of the Landlord’s costs of insuring the Property (as set out in the Lease); ] Lease • the lease of the Property dated [ date ], entered into between (1) [ the Landlord OR [ name ...
I, [ name ], of [ address ], solemnly and sincerely state that: [ Matters to be verified, set out in numbered paragraphs ] I make this solemn statement in good conscience, believing it to be true, and pursuant to the provisions of the Statutory Declarations Act 1835. DECLARED at [ details ] this [ day ] day of [ month and year ] Before me ................................................................................ [ signature of the person before whom the declaration is made ] A [ commissioner for oaths OR [ solicitor OR [ insert other qualification ] ] authorised to administer oaths ]...
Discover more from LexisNexis
