Nori Holdings Ltd v PJSC BOFC  EWHC 1343 (Comm) [England and Wales]
What (if any) implications does the Recast Brussels Regulation (Council Regulation 1215/2012) hold for the CJEU decision in West Tankers Inc v Allianz SpA (Case C-185/07)  AC 1138?
This was the question that Males J had to consider upon an application for anti-suit injunctions restraining court proceedings being pursued in Russia and Cyprus in breach of agreements to arbitrate.
Males J considered the decision in West Tankers and the detailed terms of Rectial 12 to the Recast Brussels Regulation and issued guidance on the legislative intent behind it. Nori Holdings is but one in a long line of recent English authorities dealing with the issuing of anti-suit injunctions in respect of foreign proceedings brought in breach of an agreement to arbitrate. However, in a period when questions are being asked about the extent to which the British exit from the EU could have any tangible impact upon the practice of arbitration, this judgment provides a particularly timely reminder of the continuing interface between EU law and the sanctity (or otherwise) of the agreement to arbitrate. The decision is considered at length in the article.
Ldk Solar Hi-Tech (Suzuhou) Co. Ltd V Hindustan Cleanenergy Limited (Formerly Moser Bear Clean Energy Limited) Ex.Appl.(Os) 192/2017 [India]
The High Court of New Delhi was called upon to elucidate the circumstances in which it could be asserted that the principles of natural justice had been violated by a tribunal such as to give rise to a legitimate challenge to the enforcement of the award in India.
Atlas Power Ltd v National Transmission and Despatch Co Ltd  2 Lloyd’s Rep. 113 [England and Wales]
In circumstances where proceedings were being brought in Pakistan to challenge an LCIA award, it was necessary for the court to determine whether it was the curial or domestic law that governed the validity of an arbitral award and challenges to it, properly applying the decision in C v D  EWHC 1541 (Comm)
Halliburton Company v (1) Chubb Bermuda Insurance Ltd (2) [M] (3) [N] (4) [P]  EWCA Civ 817 [England and Wales]
In this decision the Court had to consider whether in circumstances where an arbitrator accepts appointments in multiple references concerning overlapping subject matter with only one common party, there could be a perception of ‘bias’ within the meaning attributed to it in English law.
Agile Holdings Corp v Essar Shipping Ltd  EWHC 1055 (Comm) [England and Wales]
HHJ Waksman considered the circumstances in which a judge could return to points of law at the substantive hearing of an appeal from an arbitral award that had already been considered by a judge at permission stage pursuant to section 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996.
SCM Financial Overseas Ltd v RAGA Establishment Ltd  EWHC 1008 (Comm) [England and Wales]
The commercial court considered whether the refusal to grant an application for the deferment of an award by an arbitral tribunal pending the resolution of connected civil proceedings was a breach of the duty to act fairly pursuant to section 33 of the Arbitration Act 1996.
Astro Nusantara International B.V. and Others v. PT First Media TBK  HKCFA 12 [Hong Kong]
The Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal reinforces the ‘choice of remedy’ principle when determining if a party who failed to appeal an arbitral award in Singapore should be prevented from challenging enforcement in Hong Kong. The CFA also provided guidance on the correct test to apply when determining an application for extension of time to resist enforcement.
The Arbitration Briefing is part of the Bloomsbury Law Online Service. The full briefing is available here.