In Lachesis v Lacrosse [2021] DIFC CA 005, the DIFC Court of Appeal considered an application to set aside an arbitral award on grounds of failure to observe arbitral procedure, incapacity, and unfair treatment.
When a claim is filed in Court in breach of an arbitration agreement, the defendant’s key recourse is to seek an anti-suit injunction at the national courts of the seat of the arbitration to restrain the counterparty.
Whilst the Singapore Court is empowered to impose terms and conditions as it may think fit when ordering a stay of court proceedings in favour of arbitration, when will it do so?
The Philippine Supreme Court has issued new rules limiting the scope of permitted judicial review of awards issued by the Construction Industry Arbitration Commission and amending the procedural course for appeals questioning these awards.
With the spread of COVID-19 and the corresponding prevalence of remote hearing tools, it has never been easier for disputes to be heard in a foreign jurisdiction. However, parties should pay special attention to…
In recent years, we have seen the Vietnam courts recognise a growing number of foreign arbitral awards while increasingly declining to set aside domestic arbitral awards. This signals a positive and pro-arbitration landscape in Vietnam, as well as …
Authored Publication – Our firm contributes two chapters titled “The Rise of Arbitration in the Asia-Pacific” and “Maintaining the Policy of Minimising Curial Intervention in Malaysia” to the Asia-Pacific Arbitration Review 2022, a special report published by the Global Arbitration Review.
In Republic of India v Vedanta Resources plc [2021] SGCA 50, the Court of Appeal considered whether a party in an arbitration, who puts a question of law to a tribunal, can put the same question before a Singapore court (as the seat court) by way of an application for declaratory relief?
In June 2020, the Beijing No. 4 Intermediate People’s Court granted a civil ruling which dismissed the application to set aside an arbitral award issued by the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (“CIETAC”).
Please contact the editorial team at arbitrationasia@rajahtannasia.com.
© All Rights Reserved 2021
Rajah & Tann Asia is a network of member firms with local legal practices in Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam. Our Asian network also includes our regional office in China as well as regional desks focused on Brunei, Japan and South Asia. Member firms are independently constituted and regulated in accordance with relevant local requirements.
The contents of this website are owned by Rajah & Tann Asia together with each of its member firms and are subject to all relevant protection (including but not limited to copyright protection) under the laws of each of the countries where the member firm operates and, through international treaties, other countries. No part of this website may be reproduced, licensed, sold, published, transmitted, modified, adapted, publicly displayed, broadcast (including storage in any medium by electronic means whether or not transiently for any purpose save as permitted herein) without the prior written permission of Rajah & Tann Asia or its respective member firms.
Please note also that whilst the information on this website is correct to the best of our knowledge and belief at the time of writing, it is only intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter and should not be treated as legal advice or a substitute for specific professional advice for any particular course of action as such information may not suit your specific business and operational requirements. You should seek legal advice for your specific situation. In addition, the information on this website does not create any relationship, whether legally binding or otherwise. Rajah & Tann Asia and its member firms do not accept, and fully disclaim, responsibility for any loss or damage which may result from accessing or relying on the information on this website.