Arbitration Links - Linklaters
  • Year: 2017
  • Month: August

CEPA: Closer Economic Partnership Arrangement Investment Agreement

31 August 2017 Sadie Buls; Matthew Weiniger, China; Hong Kong

Tags

On 28 June 2017, Hong Kong and mainland China signed two new agreements under the Closer Economic Partnership Arrangement ("CEPA"), a step that has been described by the Hong Kong General Chamber of Commerce as marking a milestone in CEPA’s development. 

View full article

Some reflections on unmeritorious challenges to arbitrators

22 August 2017 Christian Albanesi, Europe; Latin America; United States of America

Tags

There is a general perception that unmeritorious challenges to arbitrators are on the rise. Is this really the case, how can they be identified and what can be done about them? Christian Albanesi, our Head of Latin American Arbitration, offers some thoughts.

View full article

High Court restates test for extending the time to challenge arbitral awards

15 August 2017 Adrien Canivet, England & Wales

Tags

In Rollitt (trading as CD Consult) v Ballard [2017] EWHC 1500 (TCC), the High Court rejected an application for permission to appeal an arbitral award on a point of law under section 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996 (“the Act”).  In doing so, it restated the test for extending the time to challenge an award under section 79 of the Act.

View full article

Arbitration clauses, competition claims and the case of Microsoft Mobile

08 August 2017 Alexander Fawke; Elizabeth Jordan, England & Wales

Tags

Earlier this year, in Microsoft Mobile OY (Ltd) v Sony Europe Limited & Ors [2017] EWHC 374 (Ch), the English High Court considered whether an arbitration clause in a supply contract caught a private cartel damages action. Its conclusion that it did needs to be kept in mind by claimants in this field.

View full article

The Conclusion of the Phillip Morris v Australia Saga

03 August 2017 Alexander Fawke, Australia

Tags

The long-running investment treaty dispute between Phillip Morris Asia (“PMA”) and Australia concerning tobacco plain packaging laws has finally ended, with the publication of the Tribunal’s final award on costs in July. Having already dismissed Phillip Morris’ claim as an abuse of rights, the Tribunal rejected its argument that each party should bear its own costs. It ordered Phillip Morris to cover an (undisclosed) proportion of Australia’s costs, while agreeing that Australia should bear some of its own costs due to one of its arguments on jurisdiction failing. The Tribunal’s reasoning contains important lessons for both investors and states as to the extent of permissible costs recovery in investment arbitration.

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.

Continue