Search for:
Category

Interim Measures

Category

The Ukrainian Supreme Court ruled in September 2018 on recognition and enforcement of the emergency arbitral award (the “Emergency Award”) rendered under the Arbitration Rules of the Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (the “SCC Rules”) in JKX Oil & Gas plc et al v. Ukraine case. The respective decision is remarkable for international legal and business community for being the first case in Ukraine, where the Supreme Court considered the issue of…

The Hong Kong courts can issue interim orders in aid of foreign (including the PRC) seated arbitrations, which can be useful in preserving assets and evidence held in Hong Kong (usually by the respondent company). Such interim measures are helpful because many companies (including PRC companies) often do have assets in Hong Kong. These interim orders can cover relief which may not otherwise be available from the arbitral tribunal or the courts in the foreign…

In Top Gains Minerals Macao Commercial Offshore Limited v TL Resources Pte Ltd (HCMP 1622/2015) (“Top Gains”), Mimmie Chan J once again showed the pro-arbitration attitude of the Hong Kong judiciary by continuing an injunction granted in support of a Singapore arbitration, even though the Singapore arbitration had no connection with Hong Kong. This case underscores one of the many under-stated advantages of international arbitration over court litigation:- arbitration users in countries that adopt the…

While nearly all international arbitral institutions now make provision in their rules for interim relief, national courts are often in a stronger position to provide and enforce such relief. Despite this, recent cases have demonstrated the increasing reluctance of the courts to undermine arbitral proceedings or to permit dual proceedings based on the same dispute. The recent case of Swallowfalls Ltd v (1) Monaco Yachting & Technologies Sam and (2) Peter Landers JR (2015) is…