Telecom Bus. Sols., LLC v. Terra Towers Corp., No. 22-cv-1761 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 18, 2023)[1] Factual Background In 2015, Telecom Business Solutions, LLC, LATAM Towers, LLC and AMLQ Holdings (Cay) Ltd. (collectively, “Petitioners”) entered into a shareholders agreement (the “SHA”) with Terra Towers Corp. and TBS Management (collectively, “Terra”) to co-own and operate Continental Towers LATAM Holdings, Ltd. (the “Company”). Pursuant to the agreement, the Company developed and operated telecommunication towers in Central and South America.…
Veerji Exports v. Carlos St Mary, Inc., No. 22 Civ. 3661 (LGS) (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 5, 2022)[1] Factual Background Plaintiff…
We are pleased to announce that the latest edition of the Baker McKenzie International Arbitration Yearbook is now…
In re Application of Alpene, Ltd., No. 21 MC 2547 (E.D.N.Y. Oct. 27, 2022)[1]Factual Background Alpene, Ltd., a Hong Kong corporation, was the claimant in an investor-state treaty arbitration against the Republic of Malta before the World Bank’s International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (“ICSID”). Alpene initiated a proceeding in district court in New York requesting an order authorizing subpoenas for documents and testimony from an individual residing in New York in connection…
Jiangsu Beier Decoration Materials Co. v. Angle World LLC, No. 21-3143 (3d Cir. Nov. 3, 2022)[1] Factual Background…
A. LEGISLATION AND RULES A.1 Legislation The United States is a federal jurisdiction that has arbitration-related legislation…
A. LEGISLATION AND RULES A.1 Legislation International arbitration in Canada is, for the most part, a matter of provincial jurisdiction. Each province and territory has enacted legislation adopting the UNCITRAL Model Law, occasionally with slight variations, as the foundational law for international arbitration. Canada’s federal parliament has also adopted a commercial arbitration code based on the UNCITRAL Model Law, which is applicable when the federal government or one of its agencies is a party to…
In Lavvan, Inc. v. Amyris, Inc., No. 21-1819 (2d Cir. Sept. 15, 2022),[1] the Second Circuit affirmed order denying…
245 Park Member LLC v. HNA Grp. (Int’l) Co., 1:22-cv-5136-JGK (S.D.N.Y. July 25, 2022)[1] Factual Background In 2017, Petitioner…
In Peace River Hydro Partners v. Petrowest Corp., the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) refused to stay a receiver’s civil lawsuit in favour of multiple arbitration proceedings, finding the arbitration agreements were made inoperative by court order to facilitate an orderly and single insolvency process. This case helps resolve a tension between the expedience of a single insolvency process and the presumptive enforceability of arbitration agreements. Factual Background Peace River subcontracted various Petrowest entities to…