Bloomsbury International Arbitration Briefing: December Teaser

In Brief

Leidos Inc v The Hellenic Republic [2019] EWHC 2738 (Comm) [England and Wales]

An application is issued to set aside enforcement of an award in the English jurisdiction on the grounds that enforcement has been ‘suspended’ pending a determination of the Supreme Court of Greece. The application becomes redundant following the anticipated decision within the Greek courts. Who bears the costs of the application being issued? An interesting decision of the High Court, which engages section 103(2)(f) of the 1996 Act and principles applicable to the exercise of the English court’s discretion pursuant to Part 44 of the CPR.

K v S [2019] EWHC 2386 [England and Wales]

When expert evidence is excluded from proceedings pursuant to a procedural order, the party seeking to rely issues an application to challenge those paragraphs refusing to admit the evidence in arbitral proceedings. Sir Jeremy Cooke opines upon the applicability (or otherwise) of section 68 and 34 of the 1996 Act with reference to ZCCM Investments Holdings Plc v Kansanshi Holdings PLC and Kasashki Mining PLC [2019] EWHC 1285 (Comm) (a case which featured in the August 2019 issue of this Arbitration briefing.

BSG Resources Limited v Vale S.A & Ors [2019] EWHC 2456 (Comm) [England and Wales]

During the course of an application to challenge an LCIA award, the High Court was tasked with determining what impact (if any) the fact that the applicant was in insolvency proceedings had upon the respondent’s application for security for costs. A fact-sensitive judgment of the court nonetheless provides some useful markers for the exercise of the court’s discretion under section 70 of the 1996 Act.

In Focus

Sterling v (1) Rand (2) Rand [2019] EWHC 2560 (Ch) [England and Wales]

A Beth Din tribunal orders specific performance of a contract (‘Heskem’) relating to land. In circumstances where that order was not complied with, an application was made to the High Court that engaged questions of Jewish procedural law and section 48(5) of the Arbitration Act 1996. If the Beth Din had jurisdiction to make the order, was it in all the circumstances just for the Court to issue an order for enforcement, exercising its discretion pursuant to Section 66 of the 1996 Act?

The Arbitration Briefing is part of the Bloomsbury Law Online Service. The full briefing is available here.

Written by Paul Fisher

Subscribe to the Bloomsbury Professional Law Newsletter

Law Online

Bloomsburyprofessionallaw Online research for solicitors and barristers practising in English law Free Trial

Need Help?

Bloomsburyprofessionallaw If you need any help with finding publications or just ask a question. Talk to an Advisor: 01444 416119
customerservices@bloomsburyprofessional.com
or send us a message