Ciarb London Branch’s Post

Last week, I was pleased to attend the Ciarb London Branch seminar on “Recent and Future Developments in English Arbitration Law: The Arbitration Bill and Beyond,” held at King’s College London. The discussions provided valuable insights into key proposals in the Arbitration Bill 2024 and the evolution of English arbitration law. Here are the highlights:   - The Bill confirms that the law of the seat will be the default governing law, providing clarity for arbitration agreements and ensuring consistency across disputes.   - Improvements have been proposed to streamline the framework for emergency arbitration, making the process faster and more effective for parties seeking urgent relief.   - The Bill codifies arbitrators’ duty to disclose potential conflicts of interest during pre-appointment discussions to both parties, aligning with principles in Art. 12 of UNCITRAL and IBA Guidelines.   - While summary disposal is common in English litigation, it remains rare in arbitration. The Bill introduces provisions for parties to apply for summary disposal, balancing efficiency with fairness to avoid “due process paranoia.”   - The power under s.37 of the Arbitration Act to grant anti-suit injunctions remains essential in ensuring parties adhere to arbitration agreements.   - In terms of discrimination, the Bill has opted not to address issues of gender, ethnicity, or other biases at this time.   - Also, I noticed that despite cases such as P&ID v. Nigeria, corruption and fraud remain unaddressed in the Bill. This leads to a question that I keep asking myself in that regard, Is there a need for arbitrators to adopt an inquisitorial approach or implement safeguards to address inequality of arms?   - Finally, discussions highlighted the significant impact of s.67. Unlike setting aside awards, declaring an award “of no effect” precludes further judicial review, raising concerns about finality and justice.   This seminar reinforced why London continues to be one of the most favourite seats for international arbitration. The Arbitration Bill 2024 holds promise for further enhancing efficiency, clarity, and fairness in arbitration.   How do you think should the arbitration community address issues such as corruption, disclosure, and inequalities of arms? Are these priorities for legislative reform or best left to arbitral discretion? Are we seeing enough dialogue around these topics? I would love to hear your insights and opinions. #Arbitration #ArbitrationBill2024 #LawReform #LondonArbitration #CIArb

A very useful summary of the London Principles as developed by Lord Goldsmith QC and Professor Douglas Jones AO Grateful that Zambia ticks all of these boxes and is truly a safe seat for arbitration both domestic and international. (see here https://lnkd.in/d_4kYa7x ) #arbitration

🇭🇰 The Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC) has announced the release of the new 2024 Administered Arbitration Rules, which will take effect on 1 June 2024. 🔗 You can find them here: https://lnkd.in/euNKjuZ2 💡 The adopted changes primarily focus on refining the previous 2018 rules, largely incorporating HKIAC’s existing practices and its modern approach to arbitration (e.g. HKIAC is involved in the Campaign for Greener Arbitrations and signatory of the pledge for Equal Representation in Arbitration). The main objective of these adopted changes is to maintain and further improve the efficiency and integrity of the arbitration proceedings preserving the „light touch“ administration for which is HKIAC known. ⚠️ The changes include: 1.    Considering environmental impact in the conduct of proceedings and in cost decisions (Art. 13.1; 34.4(f)). 2.    Encouraging diversity in the arbitrator selection (Art. 9A). 3.    Strengthening information security measures (Art. 13(1); 45A). 4.    Strengthening the powers of the HKIAC for efficiency (Art. 13.10; 41.4). 5.    Strengthening the powers of the Arbitral Tribunal and modifying its duties to enhance the efficiency of the proceedings (Art. 13.6; 13.9; 31.1). 6.    Addition to rules for single arbitration under multiple contracts in the context of the consolidation of arbitration (Art. 29.2). 7.    Increasing flexibility in the tribunal fees calculation (Schedules 2 and 3). ✍️ So far, Only three Czech arbitrators have been included in the HKIAC’s List of Arbitrators; two of them are attorneys of ROWAN LEGAL - Miloš Olík and Michal ČÁP. DR Team ROWAN LEGAL #ROWANLEGAL #HKIAC #Arbitration #DisputeResolution #NewRulesArbitration

The working group, led by Lord Peter Goldsmith QC and CIArb Companion Professor Doug Jones AO developed a series of ten (10) principles aimed at providing a balanced and independent basis for disputing parties to assess existing seats before choosing an effective one. In addition, the London Principles also aims to encourage the development of new seats to provide more alternatives for commercial arbitration. The elements of the London Principles include: 1. Law: A clear effective, modern international arbitration law which recognises and respects the parties’ choice of arbitration as the method for settlement of disputes. 2. Judiciary: An independent Judiciary, experienced in International Commercial Arbitration and respectful of the parties’ choice of arbitration as their method for settlement of disputes. 3. Legal Expertise: A legal profession experienced in International Commercial Arbitration and International Dispute Resolution. 4. Education: A commitment to the education of counsel, arbitrators, the judiciary, experts, users and students of the character and autonomy of International Commercial Arbitration. 5. Right of Representation: A clear right for parties to be represented at arbitration by party representatives of their choice. 6. Accessibility and Safety: Easy accessibility to the Seat, free from unreasonable constraints on entry for parties, witnesses, and counsel in International Commercial Arbitration. 7. Facilities: Functional facilities for the provision of services to International Commercial Arbitration proceedings. 8. Ethics: Professional and other norms which embrace a diversity of legal and cultural traditions. 9. Enforceability: Adherence to international treaties and agreements governing and impacting the ready recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration agreements, orders and awards. 10. Immunity: A clear right to arbitrator immunity from civil liability for anything done or omitted to be done by the arbitrator in good faith in his or her capacity as an arbitrator. #wat #ciarb #ciarbghanachapter

Don’t forget to join us this Friday, 19th July for our webinar ‘The Use of Evidence in International Arbitration: Procedure and Practice’ taking place from 12:00pm-1:00pm! The production and use of evidence in international arbitration tends to be governed by a flexible matrix of institutional and ad hoc rules and "soft law", selected by the parties and tribunal. The tribunal will oversee the production, use and management of evidence using those resources. But parties' legal backgrounds from common law and civil law traditions, and their expectations, may have to be managed and compromise sought. In this seminar the Panel will be looking at how these different factors affect the preparation and use of evidence in an international arbitration, with a view to highlighting specific issues that may need to be considered at the outset of the arbitration and commenting on the resources available to parties to assist in completion of this important stage. Register for free here – https://lnkd.in/e94Jswsy #Arbitration #International Arbitration #Disputes #TL4 Dr. David R. Parratt KC FCIArb, Zhen Ye, Ken MacDonald (Brodies Solicitors)

UKSC upholds anti-suit injunction to stop litigation in Russian courts relating to a Paris-seated arbitration: ✒ The lower court (CA) granted a final injunction ordering the appellant to discontinue Russian court proceedings. It had held that the English court had jurisdiction to grant the injunction because (i) the contracts (bonds) containing the arbitration agreement were governed by English law and (ii) E&W was the proper place in which to bring the claim. ✒In relation to (i), the appellant argued that because the seat was Paris, a French court would regard any agreement to arbitrate disputes in France as governed by the principles of French law applicable to international arbitration agreements. French law therefore applied to the arbitration agreement. ✒UKSC rejected this argument. The general rule, as held in Enka v Chubb, is that the choice of law to govern a contract will generally be construed as applying to an arbitration agreement incorporated in the contract; the choice of a different country as the seat of arbitration is not, by itself, enough to displace this conclusion. ✒It is desirable to have a clear and simple rule. An approach which treats the arbitration agreement as governed by whichever law the courts of the seat would regard as the law which governs it might be desirable from the perspective of transnational consistency, but it would be neither clear nor simple. ✒In relation to (ii), the appellant argued that France was the proper place to bring the claim as the supervisory court in any arbitration. ✒The UKSC rejected this argument. Preventing a party from breaking its contractual bargain (its agreement to arbitrate) is not a supervisory function. In addition, the underlying assumption - that to satisfy the proper place requirement it must be shown that the English court is a more appropriate forum than any other to grant an anti-suit injunction - is flawed. That approach does not apply where the parties have contractually agreed on a forum, as here, by agreeing to refer any dispute to arbitration. An unequivocally pro-arbitration decision by the English court. Full judgment / link below. #litigation #arbitration #Russia #injunction #UKSC #choiceoflaw #conflictoflaws #privateinternationallaw #comity https://lnkd.in/d-AUTt4E

UK Arbitration Bill Reaches Second Reading in House of Lords On July 31, 2024, the UK Arbitration Bill reached its second reading in the House of Lords, marking a significant step towards modernizing the #ArbitrationAct1996. This development has the potential to enhance the efficiency and attractiveness of arbitration in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland. Global Implications The Bill's reforms are expected to solidify the UK's position as a leading hub for international arbitration, making it an even more attractive destination for global businesses to resolve disputes. The modernized framework will: - Enhance the UK's competitiveness in the global arbitration market - Increase confidence in choosing London as a seat of arbitration - Align with international best practices and standards CIARB's Recommendations Following the UK's recent general election, CIARB outlines seven recommendations for the Government of the #UnitedKingdom (GovUK) to consider: 1. Renew support for the rule of law, access to justice, and private dispute resolution 2. Reintroduce the Arbitration Bill 3. Reintroduce the Litigation Funding Agreements (Enforceability) Bill 4. Progress with the integration of mediation into the civil justice system 5. Support the adoption of recommended changes to the Civil Procedure Rules following Churchill v Merthyr Tydfil 6. Ratify the Singapore Convention on Mediation 7. Integrate ADR mechanisms into infrastructure agreements and public procurement guidance CIARB's Viewpoint CIARB welcomes the expeditious advancement of the Arbitration Bill and the UK Government's endorsement of its seven key recommendations subsequent to the July 2024 General Election. The organization is gratified to observe the Bill's prompt progression through the legislative process, evidencing the government's dedication to enhancing the arbitration framework.Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (CIArb) anticipates continuing its constructive engagement with the Ministry of Justice to implement these recommendations and contribute to the establishment of a contemporary and efficacious arbitration framework in the United Kingdom. #Arbitration #DisputeResolution #UKArbitrationBill #CIARB #Mediation #ADR #AccessToJustice #RuleOfLaw #HouseOfLords #SecondReading #InternationalArbitration #GlobalDisputeResolution #Seatofarbitration

The FAI Arbitration Rules 2024 have been selected for the 32nd Willem C. Vis International Commercial Arbitration Moot, set to commence in October 2024. This marks an important milestone in the FAI’s history, dating back to its establishment in 1911. The 32nd Vis Moot is expected to draw participation from around 400 law faculties worldwide, along with hundreds of legal practitioners from both civil law and common law jurisdictions who will contribute as arbitrators, speakers, coaches, and spectators. The FAI proudly supports the study and practice of international commercial arbitration, which has the power to foster international trade as well co-operation and welfare based on cross border trade. More information to be provided soon. #arbitration #internationalarbitration #growth #vismoot

What is the #Administration of #Justice politically and legally? How does one conceive #Arbitration, a private #dispute #resolution measure, with the public administration of justice? Is there a missing connection between them and should this gap be bridged? In The Jones Day Visiting Professorship on Comparative Commercial Law: “Arbitration, Arbitrators and the Administration of Justice - Time to Make the Connection” organised by the NUS Faculty of Law on 4 April 2024, the Honourable Geoffrey Ma, Former Chief Justice of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal, shares about the intricacies of arbitration and whether there should be a link between arbitration and the administration of justice. In this Event Commentary, Alden Lee seeks to outline the takeaways from the event and discuss this missing nexus. Read the Event Commentary at https://lnkd.in/gXtkWTJg

Hong Kong Court sets aside an interim arbitral award in a complex multi-contract dispute, emphasizing the importance of strict adherence to agreed-upon arbitration procedures. This landmark decision in SYL and LBL v. GIF provides valuable lessons for arbitrators and parties involved in multi-contract arbitration. Key takeaways: - Procedural Irregularities: The court highlighted the necessity of following agreed-upon procedures, including the proper appointment of arbitrators. - Multi-Contract Arbitration Challenges: The case underscores the complexities of consolidating disputes under multiple contracts. - Strict Interpretation: Courts will strictly interpret arbitration clauses, limiting arbitral discretion. Feel free to share your thoughts and insights on this important ruling in the comments below. Link to the full article: https://lnkd.in/gHDyki2m  Authored by: Fanuel Rudi Supervised by: Kalyan Krishna Bandaru #legalnews #disputeResolution #arbitration #HongKongArbitration #InterimAward #ArbitrationLaw #ContractDispute #HKIAC #InternationalArbitration #LegalPrecedent #ProceduralFairness #MultiContractArbitration #BusinessLaw