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…

We are pleased to announce that the new edition of The Baker & McKenzie International Arbitration Yearbook is now available. The ninth edition of an annual series established by the Firm in 2007, this volume comprises reports on arbitration in key jurisdictions around the globe. Leading lawyers of the Firm’s International Arbitration Practice Group, report on recent developments in national laws relating to arbitration and address current arbitral trends in the jurisdictions in which they practice. Each chapter…

On 11 August 2015, the Tribunal in the case of Perenco Ecuador Limited v. The Republic of Ecuador (ICSID Case No. ARB/08/6) issued an Interim Decision upholding environmental counterclaims alleged by Ecuador against Perenco. In so doing, the Tribunal rejected the expert reports of both parties since they “crossed the boundary between professional objective analysis and party representation.” According to the Tribunal “each [expert] was attempting to achieve the best result for the party by…

While there are numerous U.S. court decisions holding that federal statute 28 U.S.C. § 1782 may be used to compel discovery in aid of investor-state arbitrations, far fewer have held that § 1782 may be used in aid of private, commercial international arbitrations. A recent decision by the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, In re Owl Shipping, LLC, No. 14-5655 (D.N.J. Oct. 17, 2014), did just that. Factual Background Owl Shipping, LLC and Oriole Shipping, LLC…