We use cookies to improve your website experience. To learn about our use of cookies and how you can manage your cookie settings, please see our Cookie Policy. By continuing to use the website, you consent to our use of cookies. Close

Arbitration Law Monthly RSS feed

Powers of the court: interim measures

Online Published Date : 25 September 2020 | Appeared in issue: Vol 20 No 08 - 25 September 2020

In VTB Commodities Trading DAC v JSC Antipinsky Refinery and Another [2020] EWHC 72 (Comm); [2020] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 540 Phillips LJ considered a number of points on the operation of section 44 of the Arbitration Act 1996, under which the Court is granted limited powers to grant interim relief in support of arbitral proceedings. The most important element of the judgment is the ruling that if a matter is urgent when an order is made without notice, but has ceased to be urgent when a full hearing is held, the court has no power to continue the order.

Enforcement of awards: jurisdictional issues

Online Published Date : 25 September 2020 | Appeared in issue: Vol 20 No 08 - 25 September 2020

Butcher J in London Steamship Owners' Mutual Insurance Association Ltd v The Kingdom of Spain (The Prestige) (No 4) [2020] EWHC 1920 (Comm); [2020] Lloyd’s Rep Plus 93 considered a series of jurisdictional questions relating to the failure by Spain and France to comply with an arbitration clause and then a failure to honour a Court of Appeal judgment enforcing the award. The case raised issues of sovereign immunity and of jurisdiction.

Stay of proceedings: conflicting dispute resolution provisions

Online Published Date : 25 September 2020 | Appeared in issue: Vol 20 No 08 - 25 September 2020

In Albion Energy Ltd v Energy Investments Global BRL [2020] EWHC 301 (Comm); [2020] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 501 Foxton J faced a familiar issue relating to consecutive linked agreements containing differing dispute resolution clauses. The precise context here was that of a Share Purchase Agreement containing an exclusive jurisdiction clause followed by an escrow agreement containing an arbitration clause. Foxton J was satisfied that the latter had not superseded the former.

Extension of time: serious irregularity

Online Published Date : 25 September 2020 | Appeared in issue: Vol 20 No 08 - 25 September 2020

The decision of Butcher J in Xstrata Coal Queensland Pty Ltd v Benxi Iron & Steel (Group) International Economic & Trading Co Ltd [2020] EWHC 324 (Comm); [2020] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 436 confirms that time for an appeal against an award does not begin to run until after the outcome of an application to the tribunal for clarification of the award. The decision also discusses the scope of section 68(2)(f) and the obligation of a tribunal to produce an unambiguous and certain award.