Can a tribunal order an impecunious claimant to pay security for costs? This is an often debated topic both in commercial and in investment arbitration. In recent years, several investment arbitration tribunals have dealt with applications for security for costs: – Rawat v. Mauritius (cf. article on GAN) – RSM v. Saint Lucia (cf. article on GAN) – Muhammet Çap & Sehil Inşaat Endustri ve Ticaret Ltd. Sti. v. Turkmenistan (cf. article on GAN) Once…
A. Introduction While investor-state arbitration remains a relatively new area of international law, the number of cases commenced…
The European Union and Japan have announced the main elements of a new economic partnership agreement, which has…
This table can provide a general overview only. The rules listed may not be applicable in all circumstances. Where rules distinguish between domestic and international arbitrations, only the rules applicable to international arbitrations are reflected in the table. Key: Y = Yes; N = No/Not Available/None; ? = uncertain, discretionary, or only in very specific circumstances. For further details, please see the main body of this Yearbook or contact our local office for specific advice. CountryInstitutionExpress Confidentiality…
Moving towards more gender diversity in international arbitration has gained traction. In our last year’s article, we predicted…
2016 has been another busy year for the world’s arbitral institutions. This is reflected by the institutions’ caseload…
A. Introduction International arbitration is often referred to as the area of globalization “par excellence.” Indeed, it is the preferred means of dispute resolution for multinational companies.[1] It brings together parties, counsel and arbitrators from diverse legal backgrounds, and these various legal influences make international arbitration a “live” example of the globalization of law.[2] Over the past 10 years, international arbitration has experienced spectacular growth in both commercial and investor-state arbitration. Trade is occurring more…
Indemnification clauses are common in share purchase agreements (“SPA”). Post M&A disputes frequently concern alleged breaches of such…
In a legal Opinion handed down on 16 May 2017, the Court of Justice of the European Union…
Petitioner, Trina Solar US, Inc. (“Trina”), is a California company that manufactures and sells solar panels. In 2012, Trina began negotiations with Respondents, Australia-based Jasmin Solar Pty Ltd. (“Jasmin”) and Nevada-based JRC-Services LLC (“JRC”), for the sale of such solar panels. JRC acted in tandem with Jasmin in negotiating the purchase of solar panels from Trina. In November 2012, JRC executed a written sales contract (“Contract”) with Trina to purchase the solar panels. Jasmin was…