Search for:
Category

North America

Category
In North America

District court holds that a tribunal in an ICSID arbitration is not “a foreign or international tribunal” under 28 U.S.C. § 1782 and therefore discovery may not be sought in aid of such an arbitration

by and 2 Mins Read

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…

Read More
In North America

Second Circuit affirms order denying motion to compel arbitration

by 3 Mins Read

In Lavvan, Inc. v. Amyris, Inc., No. 21-1819 (2d Cir. Sept. 15, 2022),[1] the Second Circuit affirmed order denying motion to compel arbitration, holding that there was not clear and unmistakable evidence in the parties’ contract of an intent to arbitrate arbitrability and that the appellant’s claims were not subject to arbitration. Factual Background Plaintiff-Appellee Lavvan, Inc. (“Lavvan”) brought an action against Defendant-Appellant Amyris, Inc. (“Amyris”) in district court, claiming both trade secret misappropriation under the Defend Trade…

Read More
In Canada

Final S(t)ay? Alberta Court of Appeal Rules that Alberta Arbitration Act Does Not Prevent Appeal From Master to Judge

by 5 Mins Read

In Agrium v. Orbis Engineering Field Services, the Alberta Court of Appeal held that parties can appeal a decision from a master to a justice of the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench (now the Court of King’s Bench) despite section 7(6) of the Alberta Arbitration Act(“AA”). That section prescribes that “there is no appeal from the court’s decision under this section.” The case is significant because the Court of Appeal was divided and the majority…

Read More
In North America

Michigan Court of Appeals affirms that, where an arbitrators’ decision is challenged on brevity, the proper procedure is to remand the decision back to the arbitrators rather than vacate the award

by 3 Mins Read

In In Re Romanzi; Kenneth A. Nathan v. Fieger & Fieger, P.C., Nos. 20-2278/21-1004 (Mich. Ct. App. Apr. 8, 2022), the Michigan Court of Appeals affirmed that, where an arbitrators’ decision is challenged on brevity, the proper procedure is to remand the decision back to the arbitrators rather than vacate the award, and this action falls within the clarification-completion exception to functus officio.[1] Factual Background Attorney Craig Romanzi’s employment terms at Fieger & Fieger (“the…

Read More
Load More