The Court sets aside an award on the basis that the party against whom an award had been rendered was not the party to the arbitration agreement.
Swiss Court finds that while a subcontractor was demonstrably involved in the performance of a main contract, it was insufficient to constitute implied consent to be bound by the arbitration agreement.
The English CA overturns the first instance court, holding that English Courts do have jurisdiction under s.44(2)(a) of the Arbitration Act 1996 to grant orders for taking evidence from non-party witnesses in aid of foreign arbitrations.
The HK Court dismisses an application to set aside an arbitral award, rejecting claims that the agreement was a sham and that enforcement of the award would be contrary to public policy. Edward Chin, Pupil Barrister, reviews the case.
The HK Court denies an application for a stay of proceedings to arbitration in a case concerning bills of lading. Nick Luxton, Counsel, appeared for the successful Plaintiff, and provides a review of the decision.
The English CA allows a party who did not sign an agreement to enforce the right to arbitrate on the basis that an agent had entered into the agreement on the non-signing party’s behalf.
The English Court rules that it does not have the power to compel a witness to give evidence in a New York-seated arbitration because he was not a party to the underlying arbitral agreement.
The English Court considers an application for the continuance of an anti-suit injunction against a non-party to an arbitration agreement, based on the non-party pursuing proceedings in Russia which raised overlapping issues to those which were the subject of the arbitration.
The Mainland Court has recognised the principle of severability of arbitration agreement and held that although the underlying contracts had not been formally signed, the parties had reached valid arbitration agreements.
The Singapore Court of Appeal confirms the decision of first instance court to lift a stay on proceedings but on different grounds.
The Singapore High Court dismisses an application to set aside an arbitration award under A.34 of the Model Law, finding that the tribunal had jurisdiction and that its composition was in accordance with the parties’ agreement.
A number of recent decisions from the courts in the Cayman Islands affirm the judiciary’s experience in dealing with arbitration-related disputes.
Albert Monichino QC deals with the Australian approach to the ability of third parties to claim ‘through or under’ an arbitration agreement, concluding that the dissenting approach in Reinhart, which respects privity of contract, is to be preferred.
In Cape Intermediate Holdings v Dring, the English Supreme Court confirmed the extent of a non-party’s right to obtain documents used in court proceedings, and the principles to be applied when such a request is made.Continue Reading
Baker McKenzie review the Hong Kong High Court’s decision in Dickson Valora Group (Holdings) Co …Continue Reading
Herbert Smith Freehills review the Malaysia High Court’s decision in Dato’ Seri Timor Shah Rafiq …Continue Reading
Herbert Smith Freehills review the decision in Jaya Sudhir a/l Jayaram v Nautical Supreme Sdn …Continue Reading
Courts regularly face applications to set aside or resist enforcement of awards on one or …Continue Reading
Latham & Watkins review the English High Court’s decision in J (Lebanon) v. K (Kuwait) …Continue Reading
King & Wood Mallesons review the Hong Kong High Court’s 2019 decision in Ng Yuk …Continue Reading
Albert Monichino QC reviews the recent Australian High Court decision in Rinehart v Hancock Prospecting …Continue Reading
Herbert Smith Freehills review GMR Energy Limited v. Doosan Power Systems India Private Limited, where …Continue Reading
Baker McKenzie review the 2017 Singapore High Court decision in Gulf Hibiscus Ltd v Rex …Continue Reading
Herbert Smith Freehills review the February 2017 decision of the Full Federal Court of Australia …Continue Reading