England and Wales High Court of Justice, 13 July 2018, PAO Tatneft v. Ukraine, [2018] EWHC 1797 (Comm)

In the OAO Tatneft v. Ukraine case (“investor” and “Respondent” respectively), the arbitral tribunal seated in Paris and constituted under the UNCITRAL Rules rejected all of Respondent’s jurisdictional objections in its decision on jurisdiction and ordered it to pay the investor 12 million dollars in its award. Respondent initiated annulment proceedings in France, the USA [...]

Grenoble Court of Appeal, 5 July 2018, Monsieur Louis L v. SAS Bonneval Emergence, no. 18/01877

A person subscribed to the capital increase of a company (“Company”) but backed-out shortly after, without succeeding in obtaining the restitution of the funds disbursed, even after having initiated proceedings before various trial judges. The Company initiated arbitral proceedings against the subscriber on the basis of the arbitration clause included in its bylaws. To overcome [...]

Royal Court of Justice, 1 March 2018, Jiangsu Shagang Group Co Ltd v Loki Owning Co Ltd, (2018) EWHC 330

On 1 March, the Royal Court of Justice of the United Kingdom ruled on an action for annulment by a guarantor, Jiangsu Sharang Group (JSG) against the arbitral award recognising the jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal to hear the dispute between it and the owner of the guaranteed vessel, Loki Owning Company (the owner) in [...]

ICSID, 22 December 2017, Lighthouse Corporation Pty Ltd and Lighthouse Corporation Ltd, IBC v. Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste, no. ARB/15/2

The Tribunal declined jurisdiction over a dispute brought by Australian companies. The case arose out of agreements for the supply of high speed fuel and diesel generators. The Claimants’ argued that the State consented to ICSID arbitration through incorporation by reference, signed agreements of an ICSID arbitration clause contained in their Standard Terms. They alleged [...]

2018-01-20T20:57:35+01:00December 22nd, 2017|ICSID, International awards|0 Comments
Go to Top