Legal Practice Notes

This Practice Note reviews applications made to the courts of England and Wales (with England and English used as convenient shorthand) seeking the removal of arbitrators under section 24 of the Arbitration Act 1996 ( AA 1996). Bringing a court application to displace an arbitrator pursuant to AA 1996, s 24—which is a mandatory rule of the Act (ie the parties cannot opt out)—confers upon the English court a discretion to remove arbitrators as provided by the statute itself......

Arbitration and dispute resolution in sport are frequently dictated by the bespoke rules of the pertinent federation or association. Accordingly, this Practice Note begins with a summary of how sports regulation and governance are structured, before moving to a high-level outline of sports arbitration procedures. Structural organisation of sport regulation and governance Sport is commonly overseen and regulated by associations and federations. Every such body maintains governance frameworks and detailed rules by which they are organised, and these will very often set out provisions and mechanisms for the resolution of disputes that arise within the sport. Some disciplines fall within the Olympic Games and the wider Olympic Movement. The Olympic Movement denotes ‘all organisations, athletes and other persons who agree to be guided by the Olympic Charter’ ( Olympic Charter, 2015, Rule 1.1). The International Olympic Committee ( IOC) supervises the Olympic Movement and, in...

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is archived and no longer updated. It is supplied for background purposes only. On 22 August 2023, SIAC opened a public consultation on the Draft 7 th Edition of the SIAC Rules. The draft SIAC Rules, 7 th Edition, can be accessed here. This Practice Note reviews key provisions of the Arbitration Rules of the Singapore International Arbitration Centre ( SIAC) (6th edition) 2016 (2016 SIAC Rules) relating to the presentation of evidence. The 2016 SIAC Rules apply to arbitrations begun on or after 1 August 2016, unless the parties have agreed otherwise. Evidence and conduct of proceedings In proceedings under the 2016 SIAC Rules, the tribunal may manage the arbitration in any manner it deems suitable, after consulting the parties, so as to secure a fair, speedy, economical and final resolution of the dispute (2016 SIAC Rules, r 19.1). The...

This Practice Note examines the ‘in writing’ requirement for arbitration agreements, concentrating on arrangements governed by the law of England and Wales (with England and English used as shorthand throughout this Note). It also surveys the issue from an international standpoint and also includes comparative examples drawn from various other jurisdictions worldwide. This Practice Note should be read alongside, and in conjunction with, the Practice Note: Arbitration agreements—definition, purpose and interpretation. An agreement in writing Under Part I of the Arbitration Act 1996 ( AA 1996)—mirroring the position in many jurisdictions internationally—an arbitration agreement must be recorded in writing; a purely oral arbitration agreement will not be enforced under the statutory framework and regime applicable by law. That said, the discussion below explains when an oral understanding may amount to an agreement ‘in writing’ for the purposes of the AA 1996 itself. The policy behind this is that the...

Overview of challenges to Egyptian court jurisdiction This Practice Note outlines the legal bases for contesting the jurisdiction of Egyptian courts. Jurisdiction is set by Articles 28–35 of the Law of Civil and Commercial Procedures (the ' LCCP'). These provisions determine when those courts may hear a dispute. The organising principle is territorial: the default forum is tied to the defendant’s domicile or residence, and courts apply the internationally recognised rule accordingly, save for in rem disputes involving interests in property. In rem jurisdiction: where the claim concerns a property, proceedings must be brought before the court whose geographical area covers the location of that property, as this is the court empowered to seize and hold it for legal purposes. Consequently, Egyptian courts have jurisdiction over any defendant, whether Egyptian or foreign, who resides in, or is domiciled in, Egypt. See Cour de...

ARCHIVED : This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. This Practice Note reviews the approach to the recognition and enforcement of judgments as it will operate from the UK’s exit from the EU on 31 January 2020 through to the end of the implementation period, which the EU describes as the transition period. It explores whether that implementation period could be extended, evaluates if the enforcement framework under the Brussels regime—including Regulation ( EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast)—is in force during the implementation period, as well as setting out the position after the implementation period concludes. For a quick reference Brexit research aid that answers key questions on Brexit and provides useful Brexit updates, research tips and resources, see: Brexit Bulletin—key updates, research tips and resources......

Scope of Practice Note This Practice Note addressing breach of contract explores what can constitute a contractual breach, and the judicial approach to assessing it by carefully construing the parties’ obligations—embracing both the ‘principle of futility’ and the ‘prevention principle’. It also sets out, in particular, the available responses to breach, namely an express contractual power to terminate for breach, or termination at common law for repudiatory breach, together with contractual damages and any various statutory constraints upon the remedies and liabilities arising from breach of contract. Note: a breach of contract may (though not invariably) lead to the agreement being terminated or brought to an end. Yet there are numerous other mechanisms by which a contract may end besides breach, and other circumstances in which a contract can be treated as void or rescinded. For guidance on these topics, see the...

State immunity from civil proceedings in the courts of the UK This Practice Note considers state immunity in civil claims before UK courts, with a focus on matters linked to arbitration. The default position (subject to exceptions) is that states are not amenable to the jurisdiction of the UK courts. As a result, questions of state immunity may surface where a party issues a court application against a state to: challenge or appeal an arbitral award enforce an award, or seek an injunction in support of an arbitration The principal statutory regime is the State Immunity Act 1978 ( SIA 1978). This Practice Note summarises the SIA 1978 and sets out how it has been applied to court proceedings connected with arbitration. Although the SIA 1978 applies across the UK (including Northern Ireland), the authorities cited in this Practice Note are drawn from the...

Arbitration is frequently touted as a more effective, efficient way to settle disputes than going to court. Yet, does that claim hold true? This Practice Note weighs the advantages and drawbacks of choosing arbitration instead of court proceedings to resolve construction disagreements. In particular, it aims to debunk common myths around arbitration and explores the tangible benefits it delivers in reality. Crucially, opting for arbitration does not alter the statutory UK right to refer construction disputes to adjudication. Where a contract includes an arbitration clause and a matter proceeds to adjudication, the right to seek a final determination—displacing the adjudicator’s award—still exists, but it will be pursued through arbitration rather than litigation. Time and cost Arbitration is widely viewed as faster and less costly than court proceedings. However, in some instances arbitrations can in fact take longer and cost more than litigation....

This Practice Note summarises section 41 of the Arbitration Act 1996, alongside the new section 41A brought in by the Arbitration Act 2025. It also includes links to analysis that clarifies the effect of the new provision. The Arbitration Act 2025 obtained Royal Assent on 25 February 2025. For details of when it takes effect, see Practice Note: Arbitration Act 2025 commencement and transitional provisions. Section 41 of the 1996 Act Section 41 of the 1996 Act is set out below: 41 Powers of tribunal where a party is in default. The parties may agree the tribunal’s powers where a party fails to take a step needed for the proper and speedy conduct of the arbitration. Unless the parties have agreed otherwise, the following provisions apply......

How arbitrators manage the procedure is largely determined by what the parties agree, whether through bespoke terms or by adopting institutional rules. Where no agreement exists, procedural issues can be settled at an initial meeting between the tribunal and the parties. The Arbitration Act 1996, which governs arbitrations seated in England and Wales or Northern Ireland, imposes no mandatory procedural code beyond the core duty in section 33 requiring the tribunal to conduct the proceedings fairly. The Act, however, provides a suite of default provisions that take effect unless the parties opt out. The parties are free to grant the tribunal whatever procedural powers they wish, provided those powers are exercised consistently with the overriding duty in section 33. Powers that can be excluded by party agreement Under the AA 1996, certain powers are conferred on arbitrators as a matter of default, but they do not apply where the...

This Practice Note This Practice Note reviews the statutory deadlines for mounting challenges and bringing appeals concerning arbitral awards before the English and Welsh courts ( England and English are used as convenient shorthands), under the Arbitration Act 1996 ( AA 1996), together with related and ancillary matters as well......

Pursuant to s 49(3) of the Arbitration Act 1996 ( AA 1996), and unless the parties have expressly agreed otherwise, a tribunal may order interest on any amounts it awards, on the sums ultimately awarded to a party. Section 61 AA 1996 likewise empowers it, subject to any party agreement, to determine how the arbitration costs are apportioned between them, allocating costs as between the parties. Often a costs award is issued after a final award ‘save as to costs’, and only after the parties have made submissions in light of the arbitration outcome, once they are aware of the result. Note that s 60 AA 1996 prevents parties, before any dispute has arisen, from agreeing that one side must bear all or part of the arbitration costs in any event, irrespective of result. Any such bargain is only effective if concluded after the...

This Practice Note considers the availability of anti-suit injunctions in support of arbitration from New York courts. Lexis Nexis® UK does not report citations to US judgments. Parties that have committed to arbitration may, once a dispute surfaces, reconsider that choice—particularly if one believes a court might deliver a more advantageous result. However, Section 3 of the Federal Arbitration Act ( FAA) obliges courts to stay proceedings ‘brought in any of the courts of the United States upon any issue referable to arbitration under an agreement in writing for such arbitration...until such arbitration has been had in accordance with the terms of the agreement’, so long as the party seeking the stay has not ‘default in proceeding with such arbitration’ or otherwise relinquished its right to arbitrate (9 U. S. C. § 3; Katz v Cellco P’ship, 794 F.3d 341, 345 (2d Cir....

This Practice Note sets out an overview of the powers exercised by the courts of England and Wales ( England and English are used for convenience) in connection with arbitral proceedings under English law and the Arbitration Act 1996 ( AA 1996), as amended by the Arbitration Act 2025 ( AA 2025), which received Royal Assent on 24 February 2025 and will be in force on the day of the statutory instrument. Further guidance can be found in Practice Note: A guide to the Arbitration Act 1996 ( AA 1996) and the ‘ Related documents’... The general principle—minimal interference by the courts in the arbitral process The AA 1996 is founded on three core principles, one of which safeguards party autonomy in arbitration while keeping court involvement to a minimum. That said, the English courts do possess certain powers to bolster the arbitral process. Many of these...

Consolidation Request A party may ask the AIAC to combine two or more arbitrations administered under the AIAC Rules into one proceeding where ( Rule 8.1): the parties have agreed; all claims and counterclaims are brought under the same arbitration agreement; or the claims are advanced under multiple yet compatible arbitration agreements, there is a common question of law or fact, and the rights to relief sought arise from the same transaction or a series of related transactions. The wording of Rule 3.1(c) does not make clear whether the ‘common question of law or fact’ limb is intended to apply alongside, or instead of, the ‘same or a series of related transactions’ limb. The former is newly introduced in the 2026 AIAC Rules, evidently aimed at expanding rather than narrowing the grounds for...

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is archived and no longer maintained. It is provided for background purposes only. On 22 August 2023, SIAC opened a public consultation on the Draft 7th Edition of the SIAC Rules; the draft 7th Edition is available here. This Practice Note reviews the provisions on awards and costs under the Arbitration Rules of the Singapore International Arbitration Centre ( SIAC) (6th edition) 2016 (2016 SIAC Rules). The 2016 SIAC Rules govern arbitrations begun on or after 1 August 2016, unless the parties agree otherwise. For guidance on the 2013 SIAC Rules, see: SIAC arbitration—overview. Definition of the award The SIAC Rules specify that an award covers the following (2016 SIAC Rules, r 1.3): partial award interim award final award emergency arbitrator’s award Unless the parties agree to the contrary, the tribunal may issue separate awards on distinct issues at...

The doctrine of separability This Practice Note examines the 'doctrine of separability' of arbitration agreements in international arbitration. The 'doctrine of separability' regards an agreement to arbitrate contained within a contract as an autonomous agreement, distinct from the main contract. The doctrine preserves the validity and enforceability of arbitration as the parties' chosen mechanism for resolving disputes, even if the principal contract is invalid and unenforceable. Consequently, the arbitration agreement may remain valid and enforceable, notwithstanding that the broader agreement in which it is set is itself held to be invalid and unenforceable. In effect, the parties are treated as having made two separate agreements, and the agreement to arbitrate is separable......

Confidentiality and arbitration This Practice Note explores confidentiality and arbitration under the law of England and Wales ( England and English are used as a convenient shorthand). For many participants, a key motivation for choosing arbitration, rather than pursuing litigation before national courts, is the expectation of privacy, with disclosed materials and papers created for the arbitration (including the award) ordinarily cloaked by confidentiality in their entirety, covering both the conduct and outcome of the process. Within that context, in the QMUL/ White & Case 2010 survey, ‘ Choices in International Arbitration’, 62% of respondents said confidentiality was very important in international arbitration. In the 2015 study, ‘ Improvements and Innovations in International Arbitration’, confidentiality and privacy ranked among the top five most valued features of international arbitration. The Arbitration Act 1996 ( AA 1996) is strikingly silent on...

This Practice Note is prepared in collaboration with Ms Koh Swee Yen, Senior Counsel and Partner, Mr Joel Quek, Partner, Ms Magdalene Ong, Partner, Ms Divya Harchandani, Foreign Lawyer, and Ms Thea Elyssa Vega, Foreign Lawyer, all from Wong Partnership LLP, Singapore. The 7th Edition of the SIAC Rules took effect on 1 January 2025 and can be accessed here, notably. This Practice Note reviews the early dismissal of claims and defences under the Arbitration Rules of the Singapore International Arbitration Centre ( SIAC) (7th Edition) 2025 (2025 SIAC Rules) herein. The 2025 SIAC Rules govern arbitrations commenced on or after 1 January 2025, unless the parties have agreed to the contrary. Early dismissal under the 2025 SIAC Rules, r 47 SIAC was among the earliest leading international commercial arbitration institutions indeed to adopt a process for the early dismissal of claims and...