TheLinkNG’s Post

Our latest international arbitration article on arbitrator bias #internationalarbitration #hilldickinson

Useful summary, thanks. The co-counselling item in the Orange List is a constant issue for practising barristers with arbitration practices.

The English Commercial Court has recently remitted an arbitration award due to apparent bias by an arbitrator in Aiteo Eastern E & P Company Limited v. Shell Western Supply and Trading Limited & Ors [2024] EWHC 1993 (Comm). The judgement builds on the UK Supreme Court's pivotal ruling in Halliburton v. Chubb [2020] UKSC 48, emphasising the importance of impartiality in arbitration. Iain Sharp and Bhieman Anandakumar examine the background facts and the Commercial Court's decision. More here: https://lnkd.in/ek3xb89G #Arbitration #Impartiality #CommercialCourt

CB&I UK Limited discontinued ICSID claim against the Republic of Colombia Executive summary:  Chicago Bridge & Iron Company UK (CB&I UK), a subsidiary of McDermott International, has discontinued its ICSID arbitration against the Republic of Colombia (Case No. ARB/22/11), originally filed in April 2022. This follows a decision by Colombia's Comptroller General in 2021 to hold CB&I UK liable for damages for mismanagement in the expansion of the Cartagena refinery. Nevertheless, following a June 2023 ICC arbitration finding that CB&I's subsidiaries had violated contractual obligations, McDermott agreed to settle with Reficar, Colombia's state-owned refinery operator, by transferring 19.9% of its shares to Ecopetrol, Reficar's parent company, instead of paying damages directly.  Chicago Bridge & Iron Company UK (CB&I UK), a UK subsidiary of North American technology company McDermott International, Ltd (McDermott), has discontinued its ICSID arbitration against the Republic of Colombia (Case No. ARB/22/11). The proceedings, initiated in April 2022, were based on...

Learn more >> https://bit.ly/3Y7DSYO Brattle Principal Jack Stirzaker and Senior Associate Bennet Berger have coauthored a chapter on valuing pre-operational assets in the Global Arbitration Review's “The Guide to Energy Arbitrations” Edition 6. #internationalarbitration #arbitration 

At Brattle, we are regularly asked to determine the value of energy assets before they are even operational, often in the context of complex disputes. This poses many challenges, which my colleague Bennet Berger and I illustrate in more detail in the latest edition of @Global Arbitration Review’s “The Guide to Energy Arbitrations”. Please do get in touch if you want to know more about anything you read in that, or on anything to do with energy disputes.

CB&I UK Limited discontinued ICSID claim against the Republic of Colombia Executive summary:  Chicago Bridge & Iron Company UK (CB&I UK), a subsidiary of McDermott International, has discontinued its ICSID arbitration against the Republic of Colombia (Case No. ARB/22/11), originally filed in April 2022. This follows a decision by Colombia's Comptroller General in 2021 to hold CB&I UK liable for damages for mismanagement in the expansion of the Cartagena refinery. Nevertheless, following a June 2023 ICC arbitration finding that CB&I's subsidiaries had violated contractual obligations, McDermott agreed to settle with Reficar, Colombia's state-owned refinery operator, by transferring 19.9% of its shares to Ecopetrol, Reficar's parent company, instead of paying damages directly.  Chicago Bridge & Iron Company UK (CB&I UK), a UK subsidiary of North American technology company McDermott International, Ltd (McDermott), has discontinued its ICSID arbitration against the Republic of Colombia (Case No. ARB/22/11). The proceedings, initiated in April 2022, were based on...

Recent developments show the importance of proper drafting of arbitration clauses in international contracts. I recommend you add something like this; "Any arbitration shall be seated in (name non-EU seat) and the law governing the arbitration agreement, the Lex Arbitra, shall be the same as that governing the seat, the Lex Fora." Watch my updated video at https://lnkd.in/d2-2Dd39 where I discuss Mittal v Westbridge Holdings, Achmea, Komstroy, Micula and EDF v Spain in the time it takes to drink a coffee.

Interesting to consider the way in which the USSC's decision in Loper Bright Enterprises et al. v Raimondo (Secretary of Commerce) et al (2024), 603 US (USSC), overruling Chevron and the requirement for the Court to defer to administrative and ultimately executive interpretation of statute, makes American Administrative Law slightly more akin to Canadian Administrative Law, where administrative, and ultimately executive, interpretation of statute may be found to be relevant to Judicial interpretation under certain conditions, as part of, but not the entirety of, a Driedger analysis.

Key Dates in Arbitration and Crucial Distinctions In the recent case of Friedhelm Eronat -v- CPNC International (Chad) Ltd and Cliveden Petroleum Co. Ltd [2024] EWHC 2880 (Comm), the Commercial Court provided valuable clarification on the distinction between the date an arbitral award is made and the date it is notified to the parties. The case involved a dispute concerning an indemnity deed tied to oil and gas rights. The claimant, seeking to appeal a partial arbitration award, argued that the appeal period should run from the date they were notified of the award rather than its issuance. The Court rejected this argument, confirming that under the Arbitration Act 1996, the date of an award is when it is signed by the tribunal, not when it is served on the parties. Implications for Disputing Parties - Strict Enforcement of Time Limits: In this case, the 30-day appeal period began on the date the award was made (11 April 2024), not the date of notification. - Contractual Precision: The parties’ contract explicitly waived rights to appeal under the Arbitration Act, except within the agreed terms. The Court upheld this agreement, leaving no room for an extension of time. - Prompt Action Required: The judgment highlights the importance of promptly obtaining and reviewing arbitral awards to avoid time-bar issues. Delayed collection or inaction can lead to the forfeiture of valuable rights. This judgment reinforces the importance of clearly understanding procedural rules and deadlines in arbitration. The distinction between the date an award is issued and when it is notified can have significant consequences for the rights of the parties. Time limits for appeals or challenges are strictly enforced, leaving little room for error or delay. #ArbitrationLaw #DisputeResolution #CommercialLitigation #ULA #ProceduralCompliance #TimeLimits #ContractualDisputes #LegalUpdates #BusinessLaw #LitigationRisk