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.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 149

Second Circuit affirms district court’s decision to reappoint arbitrator who had resigned
  • Locke Lord LLP
  • USA
  • June 24 2010

Yesterday, the Second Circuit affirmed a district court's decision in which the court held that an arbitrator who had previously resigned was able to rejoin the arbitration panel


Update from RAA Re Contracts Conference presentation on extra contractual obligations and losses in excess of policy limits
  • Locke Lord LLP
  • USA
  • July 23 2010

We have been tracking developments at the RAA Re Contracts Conference, which took place this week in New York, as previously reported on www


High Court confirms anti-suit injunction to protect an English arbitration clause
  • Locke Lord LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • April 28 2010

In AES Ust-Kamenogorsk Hydropwer Plant LLP v Ust-Kamenogorsk Hydropower Plant JSC 2010 EWHC 722 (Comm) the High Court ruled that it had jurisdiction to grant declarations and continue an anti-suit injunction to protect an arbitration clause in a contract between two Kazakhstani companies, AES Ust-Kamenogorsk Hydropwer Plant LLP (AESUK) and Ust-Kamenogorsk Hydropower Plant JSC (JSC


New York federal court vacates arbitration award based on evident partiality
  • Locke Lord LLP
  • USA
  • April 26 2010

Scandinavian Reinsurance Company Limited (“Scandinavian Re”) and St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Company, St. Paul Reinsurance Company, Ltd. and St. Paul Re (Bermuda) Ltd. (collectively “St. Paul”) entered into a retrocessional agreement under which St. Paul ceded a portion of its casualty reinsurance portfolio to Scandinavian Re


Good news for "non-severe" toxic sofa victims
  • Locke Lord LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • April 29 2010

Following on from our earlier blog on the High Court ruling that Zurich did not have to pay out for toxic sofa victims on the basis of Land of Leather's subsequent administration and breach of claims control clauses, it seems that more than 1,500 other victims of those toxic sofas have been handed some good news


California court refuses to extend coverage for fire intentionally set by child under homeowner’s policy
  • Locke Lord LLP
  • USA
  • January 27 2010

Recently, a California Appeals Court denied coverage under a homeowner's policy for damages caused by a fire intentionally set by the insureds' son


Incorporation of arbitration clauses by general words
  • Locke Lord LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • February 1 2010

Habas Sinai Ve Tibbi Gazlar Isthisal Endustri As ("Habas") v Sometal S.A.L. 2010 EWHC 29 (Comm) concerned an application to set aside an interim final award on jurisdiction and costs made by an arbitral tribunal by which the tribunal accepted jurisdiction to entertain a claim made by Sometal S.A.L. for breach of contract


Connecticut District Court: insurer's default judgment does not necessarily preclude litigation in subrogation action
  • Locke Lord LLP
  • USA
  • July 12 2010

A Connecticut District Court recently held that plaintiffs, who brought a subrogation action to recover a judgment entered in their favor in an underlying legal malpractice action against their attorneys, were entitled to litigate coverage issues even though the attorneys' insurer obtained a default judgment against the attorneys in a separate coverage action


West Virginia Human Rights Act prohibits discrimination by insurer in the settlement of property claim
  • Locke Lord LLP
  • USA
  • July 12 2010

In a recent decision, the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia concluded that the West Virginia Human Rights Act prohibits discrimination by an insurer in the settlement of a property claim


Court can deprive a successful defendant of costs following lies at trial
  • Locke Lord LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • December 21 2009

The Court of Appeal has ruled that it can be within a court's discretion to reduce a successful defendant's costs award by two thirds because of lies told during the trial