Search for:
Category

Costs

Category

Trajkovski Invest AB v. I.Am.Plus Electronics, Inc., No. 2:20-cv-00152-ODW (C.D. Cal. May 7, 2020) [click for opinion]. Petitioners, a collection of Swedish technology start-up entrepreneurs owning shares in the Bluetooth headphone company, Earin AB, sought damages from Respondent I.Am.Plus Electronics, Inc. for breaching a contract under which Respondent agreed to purchase Earin AB. Petitioners filed a request for arbitration with the Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (“SCC”) to resolve the dispute. Article…

Third party funding is a relatively new phenomenon in the UK; historically it had been viewed by the Courts as unethical and contrary to public policy amid fears that it promoted unmeritorious claims being brought before the Courts and resulted in conflicts of interest, both actual and perceived; such arrangements would therefore often be deemed unenforceable. Nowadays, however, third party funding arrangements are generally permissible, are becoming better understood by lawyers and the courts alike,…

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…

Recent Developments In mid-2016, the Singapore Ministry of Law conducted a public consultation on legislative amendments to introduce a legal framework for third party funding for international arbitration in Singapore. These legislative amendments were introduced in a first reading in Parliament on 7 November 2016. They are expected to be passed by Parliament shortly after the next available sitting, which is currently scheduled to take place on 9 January 2017. This update looks at the…