Tuesday, 5 February 2013 • Featured In: Volume 8 - Issue 1 (Vol. 8 Iss. 1)
Markus Burgstaller and Jonathan Ketcheson of Hogan Lovells in London report on the recent decision of an ICSID tribunal in Standard Chartered Bank v Tanzania and ask whether a shareholder needs to play an active role in making an investment in order to bring an investment treaty claim.
Monday, 4 February 2013 • Featured In: Volume 8 - Issue 1 (Vol. 8 Iss. 1)
Friday, 25 January 2013 • Featured In: Volume 8 - Issue 1 (Vol. 8 Iss. 1)
Wednesday, 23 January 2013 • Featured In: Volume 8 - Issue 1 (Vol. 8 Iss. 1)
Tuesday, 22 January 2013
Friday, 30 November 2012
Rani Mina and Philippa Charles, partners in the London office of Mayer Brown, consider the complex intersection between arbitration and equality legislation in light of the UK Supreme Court decision in Jivraj v Hashwani and a proposed bill to amend the 1996 Arbitration Act – a topic that has been overshadowed by the implications of Jivraj for London-seated arbitration.
Friday, 2 November 2012
Tuesday, 23 October 2012
Monday, 22 October 2012 • Featured In: Volume 7 - Issue 6 (Vol. 7 Iss. 6)
On 6 September, the Supreme Court of India pronounced its much-awaited verdict in the case of Bharat Aluminium v Kaiser Aluminium Technical Services – or Balco – and overruled two unhelpful judgments that were hindering Indian arbitration. Dipen Sabharwal and Aditya Singh of White & Case consider the judgment and what should happen next
Monday, 22 October 2012
The Singapore High Court recently dismissed an application to set aside an interim anti-suit injunction granted by an arbitral tribunal, showing the judiciary’s robust commitment to the efficiency of the arbitral process and non-interventionist stance. Darius Chan of Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer reports on the decision, in PT Pukuafu Indah v Newmont Indonesia Limited.
Friday, 19 October 2012 • Featured In: Volume 7 - Issue 6 (Vol. 7 Iss. 6)
Matthew Weiniger and Andrew Cannon of Herbert Smith Freehills in London report on a recent ICSID annulment committee decision affirming the principle that security for costs may only be issued in "extreme circumstances".
Wednesday, 10 October 2012 • Featured In: Volume 7 - Issue 6 (Vol. 7 Iss. 6)
Peter Gad Naschitz, Helen Raziel and Shay Tzfoni, of Naschitz Brandes in Tel Aviv, report on nearly a decade of litigation concerning whether a case between Israeli and Singaporean companies should be conducted in the Israeli courts or through SIAC arbitration, and on the jurisdiction and power of the Israeli courts to stay proceedings in favour of arbitration.