Menu
Browse Options
Enforcement of Treaty Awards against Russia in Asia: A Safe Haven for Russian Assets?

In recent years, Russia has become a frequent respondent in investment treaty matters. This is a new development. There are currently at least ten treaty claims pending against Russia, with a number of other disputes threatened. At the same time, Russia is trying to protect its assets against a large-scale enforcement campaign in Europe and the US.

On 6 August 2015, in response to these developments, the government of the Russian Federation introduced a draft law ‘On Jurisdictional Immunity of Foreign States and Foreign Sovereign Assets in the Russian Federation’ in the State Duma. Under the draft law, Russian courts would be entitled, based “on a reciprocity principle”, to exercise [...]

DIFC Court of First Instance supports enforcement of foreign ICC award against a non-DIFC award debtor

By Order of 11 May 2015 (unpublished) in Case No. ARB 005/2014 – A v. B, Justice Sir David Steel of the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) Court of First Instance dismissed an application made by an award debtor to set aside an order granted by the DIFC Court on 8 January 2015 (unpublished) for the recognition and enforcement of an International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) arbitration award issued in Paris, France, on 6 May 2014 (the “Enforcement Order”), with reasons to follow. In the terms of the application (see Application Notice ARB-005-2014/1, dated 28 January 2015, unpublished), the award debtor sought either the setting aside of the Enforcement Order or an adjournment of [...]

Breaking Arbitration’s 5-Minute Barrier: from the Archives

Dear Readers,

you may have noticed the dearth of recent posts, for which we make no excuses.

It is late summer for the northern hemisphere contributors. At this point, most of us are lingering poolside at the Kluwer International Arbitration Resort and Amusement Park, sipping procedural cocktails in the waning light as the children take turns riding the garyborn-a-coaster (but only when they are not fighting over who gets to calculate the VAT on arbitrator fees).

It’s not that we’re lazy. It’s just that we don’t feel like doing any work.

So here’s a reprint from the Kluwer archives. In other professions, this would be considered regurgitating one’s former writings. In international arbitra [...]

Arbitration Reform In India: A Look At The Hong Kong Model

The Indian Government (‘Government’) plans to revamp the country’s arbitration landscape and is considering amendments to its arbitration legislation. If the Government is keen on transforming India into a global arbitration hub, it could draw from the experience of Hong Kong, which is a successful model for arbitration in the Asia-Pacific region. Since the gazettal of China (including Hong Kong) by the Government, an increasing number of Indian parties are turning to Hong Kong for arbitration.

Adoption of the latest version of the UNCITRAL Model Law  

The Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 (‘Indian Arbitration Act’ or ‘Act’) is based on the 1985 version of the UNCI [...]

Should Court Actions Arising Out of International Arbitration Disputes Be Heard At the Singapore International Commercial Court?

and Paul Tan, Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP

Short answer: Yes for some actions, but not all. Here is why.

The Singapore International Commercial Court (“SICC”) was launched in January 2015 and provides litigants with the benefits of court proceedings and international arbitration without the constraints and setbacks of either option.

Thus far, murmurs of concern have focused on the extent to which the SICC would ‘eat into’ Singapore’s bustling international arbitration market. These concerns are, however, misconceived. The SICC’s value may lie in it exercising curial review of arbitration-related court actions.

The typical arbitration-related court actions are challenges to awards, [...]

Weighing in on the Debate about the Future of ISDS in Australia: the Productivity Commission’s 18th Trade and Assistance Review

On 24 June 2015, the Australian Productivity Commission released its eighteenth Trade and Assistance Review 2013-14.

The Commission is an independent research and advisory body, with statutory authority to report annually on the economic impacts of Australia’s international trade policy. As readers of this blog may recall, in previous years the Commission’s Review has influenced the Australian Government’s approach to the negotiation of trade and investment treaties. Most notably, the Commission’s 2010 Review prompted the then-Labor Government to adopt a policy against the inclusion of investor‑State dispute settlement (ISDS) clauses in future trade and investment treaties. This poli [...]

Contributors, Authors, Books, & More...