We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
Lexology logo
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 19

Recent Singapore High Court decision on arbitration clause controversial in light of 2012 ICC rules

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • Singapore
  • -
  • February 22 2013

The Singapore High Court (the "Court") considered whether an arbitration clause which stipulated that disputes were to be settled by arbitration

An end to “speculative” challenges to arbitral awards? The English courts raise the sanction of indemnity costs for unmeritorious s68 applications

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • April 3 2013

Over the past few years, we have seen a substantial rise in the number of applications to the English court challenging arbitral awards on grounds of

Enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in Dubai

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Arab Emirates
  • -
  • January 8 2013

In September last year, the highest court in Dubai upheld two DIFC-LCIA awards under the New York Convention (Airmech v Macsteel International). While a

Amended Civil Procedure Law is good news for arbitrations in mainland China

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • China
  • -
  • October 3 2012

An amended Civil Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China comes into force on 1 January 2013 and introduces some important changes to the domestic and foreign relation arbitration regimes in China

Australian court grants leave to enforce Chinese award against company in liquidation

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • Australia
  • -
  • April 24 2013

On 19 April 2013, Justice Foster of the Federal Court of Australia handed down judgment in the case of Eopply New Energy Technology Co Ltd v EP Solar

U&M Mining Zambia Ltd v Konkola Copper Mines Plc: Court of the seat does not have exclusive jurisdiction to grant interim measures in support of arbitration

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom, Zambia
  • -
  • February 28 2013

In the recent case of U&M Mining Zambia Ltd v Konkola Copper Mines plc 2013 EWHC 260 (Comm), the court examined the question of whether English

Broad US discovery ordered in support of a foreign-seated arbitration: Eleventh Circuit holds that a private commercial arbitral tribunal is a “foreign tribunal” for the purposes of 1782 discovery

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • Ecuador, USA
  • -
  • July 11 2012

In the recent case of In re Consorcio Ecuatoriano de Telecomunicaciones S.A., v. JAS Forwarding (USA), Inc., Case No. 11-12897, 2012 WL 2369166 (11th Cir. June 25, 2012), the Eleventh Circuit held that private commercial arbitral tribunals fall within the scope of 28 U.S.C. 1782 and ordered 1782 discovery in relation to a domestic private commercial arbitration in Ecuador

Singapore High Court examines its approach towards interim orders in arbitral proceedings

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • Singapore
  • -
  • November 9 2012

The Singapore High Court (the “Court”) has refused to set aside an interim anti-suit injunction ordered by an arbitral tribunal (the “Tribunal”) in the case of PT Pukuafu Indah and others v Newmont Indonesia Ltd and another 2012 SGHC 187

English High Court upholds two challenges to jurisdiction

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • March 22 2013

The English High Court has recently set aside two arbitration awards under section 67 of the Arbitration Act 1996 (1996 Act) on the grounds of lack

English Court decision on enforcement of awards annulled at the seat: (1) allows part of Rosneft’s appeal in Yukos Capital v Rosneft on basis that issue estoppel does not apply; and (2) provides guidance on the limitations of the act of state doctrine

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • July 3 2012

The Court of Appeal has allowed part of Rosneft’s appeal in the long-running Yukos Capital v Rosneft case