Arbitration analysis: Sir Michael Burton QC, sitting as a High Court judge in the Commercial Court, dismissed four grounds of challenge to an International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) award made pursuant to sections 67 and 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996), three on the grounds of serious irregularity and the fourth a jurisdiction challenge.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in with ÀÏ˾»úÎçÒ¹¸£Àû or register for a free trial
EXISTING USER? SIGN IN CONTINUE READING GET A QUOTE
To read the full news article, register for a free Lexis+ trial
**Trials are provided to all ÀÏ˾»úÎçÒ¹¸£Àû content, excluding Practice Compliance, Practice Management and Risk and Compliance, subscription packages are tailored to your specific needs. To discuss trialling these ÀÏ˾»úÎçÒ¹¸£Àû services please email customer service via our online form. Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK, Ireland and selected UK overseas territories and Caribbean countries. We may terminate this trial at any time or decide not to give a trial, for any reason. Trial includes one question to LexisAsk during the length of the trial.
* denotes a required field
Arbitration analysis: This case demonstrates the court’s approach to section 45(4) of the Arbitration Ordinance (the ‘Ordinance’) Cap.609 which expressly permits the court to decline to grant interim relief. The court was prepared before the tribunal was constituted to grant an ex parte injunction
Law360: The Supreme Court will not hear an attempt by Spain to overturn part of its challenge to a decision that it lacked sovereign immunity in a complex case brought by insurers over the Prestige oil spill off the Spanish coast.
Arbitration analysis: The Supreme Court of India (SC) recently clarified that the dispute resolution mechanism provided in the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (the MSME Act) for disputes concerning delay in payment of a micro or small supplier’s payments overrides the
Arbitration analysis: This case involved an appeal to the Singapore High Court challenging an ICC Arbitral Tribunal’s decision that it did not have jurisdiction over one co-respondent to the proceeding per section 10(3) of the International Arbitration Act (Cap 143A, 2002 Rev Ed) (IAA). The
0330 161 1234