Arbitration Links - Linklaters

Intra-EU investment arbitration post-Achmea: A look at the additional remedies offered by the ECHR and EU law

24 April 2018 Guillaume Croisant; Xavier Taton, Europe


In its landmark Achmea case, the Court of Justice of the EU (“CJEU”) found the arbitration provision of the bilateral investment treaty (“BIT”) between the Netherlands and Slovakia to be incompatible with EU law (see our previous post for a first analysis).

This decision potentially affects the roughly 200 BITs concluded between the EU Member States, although its overall implications are far from clear. Against that background, however, investors in EU Member States who object to State measures which have impacted their investments elsewhere in the EU might be expected to look for additional routes to a remedy. What might these be? Two which stand out for closer analysis in particular are the European Convention on Human Rights (“ECHR”) and the fundamental principles of EU law.

View full article

Successful challenge on basis of serious irregularity – A tribunal’s failure to deal with contribution claim

13 April 2018 Sadie Buls, England & Wales


In P v D & Ors [2017] EWHC 3273 (Comm), London’s Commercial Court upheld a challenge to a London Court of International Arbitration award brought under s.68 Arbitration Act 1996 for serious irregularity. The claimant sought remission of the award on the basis that the Tribunal failed to deal with all the issues that were put to it (in particular, it failed to consider the claimant’s contribution claim in the proceedings), thereby causing the claimant substantial injustice. In its judgment, the Court identified a number of errors in the Tribunal’s award and provided guidance on when a LCIA Tribunal can exercise post-award powers to make corrections or issue additional awards under the LCIA Rules.

View full article

Does a slip buy more time? English High Court considers the relationship between corrections of awards and time limits for appeal

05 April 2018 Stephen Lacey, England & Wales; Europe


In DSMG v Songa [2018] EWHC 538 (Comm), the English High Court has examined whether an application to the tribunal to make straightforward corrections to an award extends, under the English Arbitration Act 1996 (the “Act”), the period for bringing a challenge in court against the award. It appears that it is only where an application for corrections is material - in the sense of enabling a party to know whether it has grounds to challenge an award - that it will do so.

View full article

To reform or to update? Thoughts from the BICCL 16th Annual Review of the UK Arbitration Act

The British Institute of International and Comparative Law hosted the 16th Annual Review of the Arbitration Act at the end of last year. At the event, speakers discussed whether the Arbitration Act 1996 (“the Act”) is currently in need of reform. The speakers agreed that a complete overhaul of the Act is not required, but all highlighted different areas that might usefully be revisited due to developments in international arbitration in the past two decades.

29 March 2018 Stephen Lacey; Sadie Buls, England & Wales

View full article

OHADA adopts new texts on arbitration and mediation

The revised OHADA Uniform Act on Arbitration (the Arbitration Act) and revised Rules on Arbitration of the Joint Court of Justice and Arbitration (the CCJA) (the Rules), as well as the new Uniform Act on Mediation (the Mediation Act), entered into force on 15 March 2018. The fruit of nearly two years of consultations among the 17 Member States of the Organisation for the Harmonization of Corporate Law in Africa (OHADA), these new acts will apply to all proceedings initiated as of such effective date. These acts had all been approved on 23 November 2017 by the OHADA Council of Ministers.

20 March 2018 Clément Fouchard; Roland Ziade, Africa

View full article

CJEU judgment in Slovak Republic v. Achmea BV: intra-EU BITs incompatible with EU law

In the much anticipated judgment of 6 March 2018 (Case C-284/16), the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) found the arbitration provision of the bilateral investment treaty (“BIT”) between the Netherlands and Slovakia to be incompatible with EU law. As the decision potentially affects not less than 196 BITs between EU Member States (“intra-EU BITs”), it is likely to have significant consequences for the world of intra-EU BIT arbitration. Yet, its overall implications are far from clear, so that the judgment will loom large for some time to come.

13 March 2018 Julia Grothaus; Rupert Bellinghausen, Europe; Germany

View full article

English High Court considers the impact of third party funding in the context of a challenge to an Award

In Progas Energy Limited et al v the Islamic Republic of Pakistan [2018] EWHC 209 (Comm) the English High Court considered the conditions to be imposed on the Claimants who sought to challenge an award.

The Court ordered security for costs against the Claimants notwithstanding the fact that they had the support of a commercial third party funder. However, third party funding did not impact on the Court’s refusal to order, as a condition of the challenge, the security of sums due under the award being challenged.

28 February 2018 Mikhail Vishnyakov, England & Wales

View full article

This site uses cookies, if you continue without changing your settings, we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies. Click here to learn how to change your cookie settings.