Tag: Arbitration

Dubai Arbitration Week 2025 started as a community project in 2014 and has grown into a significant event on the international arbitration calendar. Every November, specialists gather in Dubai for technical sessions, strategy talks and social events that showcase the city’s capability as a global forum for cross-border disputes. The programme is curated by a community committee and supported by the Dubai International Arbitration Centre (DIAC), regional institutions, and international, regional and local law firms.

Dubai Arbitration Week 2025 followed the familiar format but delivered a larger, more ambitious edition. Conference rooms and hotel spaces filled with debates about global disputes, enforcement strategy, and the shifting patterns of international arbitration. Many discussions continued long after the formal sessions ended, reflecting the sense that Dubai has become a genuine meeting point for practitioners from every major arbitration jurisdiction.

Dubai Arbitration Week 2025 in numbers

The 2025 edition brought together more than 1,000 delegates. More than 140 events took place between 10 and 14 November. Commercial arbitration, investor–state disputes, construction and energy cases, and enforcement matters dominated the programme.

Dubai’s role as an international arbitration hub mirrors the movement of trade and investment across the region. Disputes connected with the Middle East, Russia,  Africa, and Central and South Asia often find their way to Dubai. Parties regard it as a practical, neutral seat with dependable procedures and a legal system comfortable with complex cross-border cases. For practitioners, Dubai Arbitration Week 2025 offered an opportunity to understand how different regional groups approach these disputes and how institutions are adapting to global tensions and economic challenges, such as rising national debts and cost-of-living pressures.

Sanctions, Russian parties and DIAC arbitration

Sanctions were one of the most prominent themes of Dubai Arbitration Week 2025. Dubai remains a venue where sanctioned companies and Russian lawyers can attend public events and share their views with a global audience. Their presence in 2025 was significant, shaping several sessions on energy disputes and enforcement risks.

Panels focusing on oil and gas disputes examined sanctions affecting projects in Iraq and other regions, including the recent designation of a major Russian oil company, Lukoil, and the resulting impact on contract performance, arbitration clauses, and enforcement strategy. The discussion showed why DIAC arbitration and other Dubai-seated arbitration proceedings continue to appeal to sanctions-affected parties. Tribunals can still hear both sides, maintain proper procedure and preserve enforceability while dealing with restrictions that might block access to other seats.

African arbitration and alternative perspectives

Africa’s growing influence in international arbitration was evident throughout the week. “Africa Day” and several dedicated sessions highlighted the increasing number of disputes involving African energy, infrastructure and technology projects. Speakers emphasised the strength of African institutions and the expertise of African practitioners.

GCC arbitration centres and regional competition

Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) arbitration centres were highly active during Dubai Arbitration Week 2025. Institutions from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain and other Gulf states hosted sessions to highlight new rules, state-of-the-art hearing facilities and improved enforcement performance. Their message reflected a regional ambition to retain more disputes and offer strong alternatives to global centres.

A reception hosted by the Bahrain Chamber for Dispute Resolution at the top of the Burj Khalifa captured this sense of ambition. It highlighted the speed at which the Gulf has built the infrastructure needed for high-value arbitration. This competition benefits users, as DIAC and other Gulf institutions continue to refine their rules, improve services and raise the overall standard of arbitration across the region.

English law, English practitioners and DIAC arbitration rules

English law continued to play a significant role during Dubai Arbitration Week 2025. Many regional contracts continue to choose English law for predictability and commercial familiarity. English barristers and solicitors remain active in Dubai, advising on drafting, seat selection and advocacy.

What has changed is the assumption that English courts or the LCIA must always be the default. Many parties now select Dubai as the seat while keeping English law as the governing law. DIAC arbitration rules offer a modern and efficient framework that suits English-law-governed disputes. This blended approach appears to be gaining momentum, especially among parties seeking predictable procedures combined with regional convenience.

Future outlook for Dubai as an international arbitration hub

By the end of Dubai Arbitration Week 2025, a clear picture had emerged. Dubai is no longer seen as an alternative seat. For many, it is already a first choice for disputes involving sanctioned entities, multi-regional supply chains and counterparties from MENA, the FSU, Africa and South Asia. DIAC arbitration continues to grow in influence and offers users confidence in awards seated in Dubai.

Competition remains strong. Gulf centres and Asian and African hubs such as Singapore, Hong Kong, Cairo, Kigali and Lagos are investing heavily in their arbitration offerings and enforcement systems. The next decade will be shaped by how these centres position themselves and how users distribute their cases.

FAQs

What is Dubai Arbitration Week 2025?

Dubai Arbitration Week 2025 was a five-day programme of international arbitration events held in November. It brought together global practitioners for sessions on commercial disputes, sanctions, Africa-focused arbitration and GCC developments. The week reinforced Dubai’s status as a leading venue for cross-border arbitration.

Why is Dubai a critical international arbitration hub?

Parties value Dubai’s neutrality, strong infrastructure, and supportive courts. DIAC arbitration offers a modern, efficient framework that helps make Dubai a preferred seat for high-value international arbitration.

How did sanctions shape discussions in 2025?

Sanctions featured prominently throughout the week. Dubai remains one of the few places where sanctioned parties and Russian lawyers can participate openly. Sessions explored how sanctions affect contract performance, arbitration clauses and enforcement. DIAC arbitration was highlighted as a workable option for sanctions-heavy disputes.

Why was African arbitration so visible this year?

Africa-focused sessions reflected the growing number of disputes linked to energy, infrastructure and digital projects across the continent. Dubai appeals to many African parties because it is accessible, neutral and familiar with African legal systems. Speakers noted a shift towards resolving more disputes within Global South arbitration hubs.

What role did English law play in Dubai-seated arbitration?

English law continues to govern many commercial contracts in the region. Parties increasingly retain English law while choosing Dubai as the seat of arbitration. The DIAC arbitration rules support English law-governed disputes, and English barristers and solicitors remain active in drafting, advising, and advocating in Dubai.

To discuss any points raised in this article, please call us on +44 (0) 203972 8469 or email us at mail@eldwicklaw.com.

This article does not constitute legal advice. For further information, please contact our London office.

A strong sense of motion defines modern Azerbaijan. Known as the land of fire and ice, the country is enjoying stability in terms of commerce and the rule of law. Nowhere does progress echo more loudly than in Baku, where old stone meets glass, and aspiration is as bright as the Flame Towers at dusk.

The inauguration of the Baku Arbitration Centre (BAC) was neatly folded into the wider spectacle of the Azerbaijan Arbitration Days 2025. This was not simply a regional conference. To myself and Waleed, it signalled a significant shift: from hydrocarbons to commercial hubs, from handshake deals to robust legal rules written for an international age.

Our observations were that neutrality, transparency, and fairness run through the BAC. This shows in the new rules, the leadership, and the inclusive bilingual approach. Chief Justice Karimov and Justice Minister Ahmadov delivered the centrepiece speech in excellent English, reflecting Azerbaijan’s readiness to engage in international trade and commerce. The BAC opens the door to locally resolved, internationally respected commercial disputes.

Inclusion and accessibility matter. BAC’s publications and training initiatives support a new generation of lawyers keen to shape the future of Eurasian law.

What are Azerbaijan’s primary industries?

This land has always traded in contrasts. In the twenty-first century, energy stands at the centre, with oil and gas bankrolling infrastructure and social change. GDP is climbing steadily. Foreign investment follows suit, turbocharged by pipeline deals and new gas fields that stretch Azerbaijan’s reach as far as Israel.

In addition, progress on the Zangezur Corridor is moving swiftly. Speaking at the 7th Consultative Meeting of Central Asian Heads of State in Tashkent, President Aliyev stated:

“The construction of the Zangezur Corridor on the territory of Azerbaijan is nearing completion. With an initial throughput capacity of 15 million tons, this railway will become an important artery of the Middle Corridor,” he said, adding the highway that will form part of the multi-modal corridor is also close to finalization.”

Everything in Baku whispers of progress while retaining a sense of history; the old city walls and the sweep of modern boulevards bear this out.

Arbitration Days 2025

The BAC’s debut attracted over 600 delegates, including judges, lawyers, policymakers, and business chiefs, from seventy countries. Just shy of 100 speakers covered everything from procedural reform to digital transformation in dispute resolution.

Outside the formal stage, events hosted by the Turkic Arbitration Association reminded guests of the region’s spirit for partnership.

Looking towards the future

The BAC’s launch rests on the shoulders of reforming judges and a business community eager for regional solutions. Clarity and predictability in dispute resolution attract investment and secure growth.

Arbitration Days 2026 promises an even broader canvas, drawing in legal minds from across Europe, Central Asia, and the Middle East. For any lawyer or business with an eye on the Caucasus, it’s a date for the diary.

Concluding comments

Azerbaijan has written a new chapter in law and commerce. The BAC stands as a work in progress and a promise, an institution invested in fairness, clarity, and progress. As dialogue with neighbouring states edges toward peace and as infrastructure projects tie the region ever closer, the rule of law becomes increasingly important. If business, trust, and cooperation matter, Baku seems ready to set the terms.

FAQs

What is the Baku Arbitration Centre?

A specialist institution for commercial arbitration, designed to meet international standards and offer solutions to businesses in Azerbaijan and beyond.

What made Arbitration Days 2025 stand out?

An impressive roster: speakers from nearly 100 countries, a government-backed launch, and a genuine sense that Azerbaijan is open for global business.

Why does the Middle Corridor matter?

It places Azerbaijan at the centre of trans-Eurasian trade, making efficient legal solutions crucial for investment and growth.

How does arbitration in Baku help business?

It brings speed, neutrality, and local expertise to the table, qualities that investors and trading partners seek.

Will BAC handle cross-border cases?

Absolutely. International and regional disputes alike are at the heart of its mission.

To discuss any points raised in this article, please call us on +44 (0) 203972 8469 or email us at mail@eldwicklaw.com.

This article does not constitute legal advice. For further information, please contact our London office.

Rashid and Charles discussed the dispute-resolution landscape in Central Asia, from differences in jurisdiction and enforcement between states to the rise of construction and renewable-energy claims, and the overlap between commercial and investor-state cases. They also touched on headline matters around the Kashagan and Karachaganak oil fields, using them to illustrate recurring themes such as delay and cost-overrun claims on megaprojects, and the practicalities of enforcing against state-linked counterparties.

Rashid also shared insights from his career as a dual-qualified UK and Kazakh practitioner and spoke about the growth of the AIFC (Astana International Financial Centre) as a credible regional forum offering English law-based dispute resolution for foreign investors.

As a London dispute-resolution boutique focused on cross-border matters, Eldwick Law is proud to contribute to thoughtful discussion in this area and to support the legal community’s engagement with a fast-evolving region.

A commentary on s.44 of the Arbitration Act 2025

Confusing, unsatisfactory, inconsistent. These are some of the words that could be used to describe Section 44 of the Arbitration Act 1996 (“s.44”) just last year. With the Arbitration Act 2025 coming into force in August 2025, reforms have been introduced which aim to enhance efficiency and maintain England and Wales as a leading arbitration destination.

S.44 Powers Pre-Arbitration Act 2025

Confusion regarding s.44 stemmed from the fact that s.44(1) did not clarify how far the powers of the court extended. Three major cases relating to s.44 only served to further muddy the waters. The first case, Cruz City v Unitech [2014] EWHC 3704 (Comms), revolved around whether the court could grant an interim injunction against a third party under s.44(2)(e). The High Court concluded that the power did not extend to non-parties and denied the injunction. Similar attempts to apply s.44(2)(b) were equally unsuccessful in DTEK Trading SA v Morozon [2017] EWHC 1704.

However, in the Court of Appeal case of A and B v C, D and E [2020] EWCA Civ 409, the Court held that s.44(2)(a) – the taking of the evidence of witnesses – was applicable to third parties. The reasoning of Flaux LJ was partially influenced by the fact that it is often rare for a witness to be a party to the arbitration.

Changes to s.44

S.44 seeks to clarify any uncertainty with a concise amendment, specifically to s.44(1): “whether in relation to a party or any other person”. The inclusion of ‘any other person’ clarifies that the court now has the power to make orders against uninvolved third parties in support of an arbitral award.

As regards what orders the court may make, s.44(2) lists them as: 44(2)(a), Taking of the evidence of witnesses

• 44(2)(b), Preservation of evidence
• 44(2)(c)(i), Inspection, photographing, preservation, custody or detention of property subject of the proceedings
• 44(2)(c)(ii), Samples, observation or experiment of property subject of the proceedings
• 44(2)(d), Sale of any goods subject of the proceedings
• 44(2)(e), Granting of an interim injunction or appointment of a receiver

The court’s power to make interim injunction orders against non-parties should serve as a warning to those connected to any arbitral dispute.

Future Development of s.44

The Arbitration Act 2025 provides useful clarification on s.44. The conditions in which the court might make orders against third parties are yet to be determined and could likely come down to a case-by-case basis. Third parties’ retention of the full right of appeal under s.44(7) will also likely result in increased litigation as non-parties seek to prevent courts from imposing costly orders upon them. The door has now been opened for direct parties of arbitral proceedings to access orders and evidence previously denied. The dynamic between direct and indirect parties is likely to shift to a more adversarial one as direct parties seek evidence (inter alia) from indirect parties.

Conclusion

While the full consequences of s.44 reforms are yet to be seen, this is undoubtedly the beginning of a new era of court involvement in arbitral proceedings. Courts now have the authority to grant a wide variety of orders against third parties. However, the willingness and situations where the courts will grant these orders are yet to be seen and will be an area for case law development.

Therefore, when arbitral proceedings are being commenced, parties both directly and indirectly involved should be attentive to the rights and obligations that they may have. Swift, decisive action will be vital in protecting their interests and ensuring a favourable outcome.

Choice of Governing law

The data from the ICC over the past three years confirms the preference for English and Welsh governing law in international arbitration. A steady and consistent use of English law has been reported, with 125 cases governed by it in 2024, maintaining its primary position. In contrast, the use of U.S. law has seen a gradual decrease, from 81 cases in 2023 to 69 in 2024 and Swiss law, which featured prominently in 2023 with 83 cases, fell from the top ranks in 2024 after recording 53 cases in 2022. This comparative trend reflects a global appeal of the English legal system’s respect for party autonomy, especially for parties that seek predictability in decisions. Party autonomy refers to the freedom of contracting parties to determine the terms of their agreement, which is fostered by an objective interpretation of contracts by the English courts. By giving priority to the express terms of the contract and avoiding reliance on extrinsic evidence, the choice of English and Welsh governing law is more attractive to international parties for its legal certainty and protection of agreed terms.

Seat Choice

There has also been a slight shift in seat selection within ICC arbitrations in favour of the United Kingdom. In 2024, the UK overtook France as the most selected seat, with 96 cases compared to France’s 91. This is a reversal of the previous year where France led with 99 cases against the UK’s 85. This upward trajectory continues from 2022, when the UK was selected in 74 cases. Since the introduction of the Arbitration Act 1996, the UK has established a reputation for judicial non-interference. English judges generally refrain from intervening in the conduct of arbitral proceedings and are supportive in enforcing final awards, creating a legal environment that reinforces the finality and integrity of arbitration.

Lengths and delays of Proceedings

The average duration of ICC arbitration proceedings has remained relatively stable over the past three years, typically concluding within 26 to 27 months. In 2024, the average duration was 26 months, consistent with 2022 and slightly improved from 27 months in 2023. However, data on procedural delays indicates some growing inefficiencies. In 2024, 75 cases experienced delays exceeding two months, compared to 49 cases in 2023 and 29 cases in 2022, showing an upward trend in longer delays despite the stable overall duration.

Despite the rising number of delays there has been reform enacted to streamline the arbitral process. This is exhibited by the ICC’s 2021 Rules, which introduced stricter time limits for arbitrators to render awards, including financial penalties such as reduced fees if deadlines are not adhered to. While these measures aim to encourage efficiency and meet procedural deadlines, they appear to have limited de facto impact.

A key factor that could be contributing to the worsening of delays, despite the changes in promoting efficiency, is the phenomenon of due process paranoia. This occurs when tribunals adopt an overly cautious approach to avoid challenges to final awards based on procedural unfairness. This has led to arbitrators granting repeated procedural requests from parties, particularly at late stages, which undermines both efficiency and equal treatment. As seen in cases like Jaguar Energy and Anwar Siraj, courts generally support tribunals’ procedural decisions and reject weak due process challenges. However, the inflated perception of risk continues to affect case management, enabling actions that prolong proceedings and increase delay.

Changes in Asian regional distribution

The ICC data also reveals subtle changes in the regional distribution of parties involved in arbitrations, including a gradual decline in participation from Central and West Asia. In 2022, parties from this region accounted for 11% of the caseload, rising to 12.7% in 2023 before falling to 10% in 2024. This downward trend may reflect the development and appeal of regional arbitration centres, such as the Dubai International Arbitration Centre (“DIAC”) and the Qatar International Court and Dispute Resolution Centre, which offer geographically closer and often more cost-effective alternatives. Conversely, North and West European parties continued to dominate, rising from 28.8% in 2023 to 30.2% in 2024. These figures suggest a rebalancing of global arbitration activity, with European parties consolidating their presence and some Asian and Middle Eastern parties exploring arbitration locally.

Future changes

Looking to the future, English law will continue to dominate arbitration proceedings. As for seat preference, the recent enactment of the Arbitration Act 2025 introduces a series of targeted reforms that modernise and enhance the efficiency of the arbitration process in England. Tribunals have been given new powers to summarily dispose of claims; the Act has provided clarification of court authority over third parties, codification of emergency arbitrator enforcement, and stricter procedures for challenging awards. These reforms, in combination with England’s commercial jurisprudence and pro-arbitration judiciary will likely further increase the appeal of English law and London as the seat of arbitration.

Comparative Analysis

HKIAC

The 2024 statistics reveal that the ICC maintains a broader global presence compared to HKIAC. Parties to ICC arbitrations came from 145 countries, whereas HKIAC involved parties from 34 jurisdictions, primarily from Asia and offshore hubs such as Mainland China, Hong Kong, and the Cayman Islands. While both institutions conduct most arbitrations in English, HKIAC maintains a significant portion in Chinese (15.9%) or bilingually (4.3%), reflecting its regional orientation.

The choice of governing law further illustrates the difference between the HKIAC’s more local appeal in comparison to the global attractiveness of the ICC. In 2024, ICC arbitrations involved over 100 different legal systems, with English law as the dominant choice. HKIAC cases, while involving 15 governing laws, primarily applied Hong Kong law, followed by English and Chinese law, reinforcing its alignment with the Greater China commercial bubble. Overall, the ICC shows greater international diversity, whereas HKIAC displays its appeal for tackling Asia-based party disputes.

LCIA

English and Welsh law continues to dominate as the governing law in both LCIA and ICC arbitrations. However, recent statistical reports suggest that there has been a decline in its choice. At the LCIA, the choice of English law has gradually declined: from 85% of arbitrations in 2022 to 83% in 2023, and down to 78% in 2024. Likewise, English law was chosen in 125 (15%) new cases for ICC proceedings in 2024, this represents a decline from 131 cases in 2023. This drop may indicate that while London remains a preferred seat, parties are increasingly opting for other governing law provisions.

Conclusion

The 2024 data confirms that English law and London remain central to international arbitration, despite minor declines in usage. Their continued dominance stems from the legal consistency, party autonomy, and enforcement-friendly environment they offer. The Arbitration Act 2025 is expected to strengthen this position further by modernising English arbitration and improving procedural efficiency.

While institutions like HKIAC and DIAC are increasing in popularity regionally, the ICC maintains a broader international presence, accommodating a wider range of legal systems and parties. The LCIA’s gradual diversification in governing law choices signals growing openness but still reflects the appeal of English law.

Overall, the trends indicate that jurisdictions offering legal clarity, efficient procedures, and judicial support will remain at the forefront of global arbitration. England’s proactive legal reforms and arbitration-friendly stance ensure it continues to lead in this evolving landscape.

Arbitration is a powerful alternative dispute resolution (ADR) method that is often used to settle international commercial disputes. Given the complexities of arbitration proceedings and enforcement, having an experienced Arbitration Solicitor advise you is imperative.

Arbitration agreements are final and binding.

Parties can choose the jurisdiction in which they wish the arbitration to take place, the rules governing the procedure, and the appointment of the Arbitrator/s. One of the reasons arbitration is a preferred method of dispute resolution for commercial entities is that Arbitration Awards can be enforced internationally. The Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, also known as the “New York Arbitration Convention” or the “New York Convention”, is one of the key instruments in international arbitration.

The New York Convention applies to the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards and the referral by a court to arbitration.

Arbitration in England and Wales is governed by the Arbitration Act 1996; therefore, if you plan to enforce an award in this jurisdiction, you must have regard for the Arbitration Act 1996 from the outset.

Why is it crucial to have a Solicitor draft an Arbitration Agreement?

Parties that enter into Arbitration Agreements are often involved in contracts worth millions, sometimes billions of pounds (or dollars) involving projects or deals spanning multiple jurisdictions. For this reason alone, it is vital to ensure the Agreement is drafted by experienced Arbitration Solicitors.

Arbitration Agreements set out essential terms such as:

• How the Arbitrator will be selected.
• Where the arbitration will be heard (the seat of arbitration).
• What law will govern the arbitration.
• Whether the arbitration tribunal comprises one member or three.

The former Secretary General of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) International Court of Arbitration, Frederic Eisemann, identified the term’ pathological clause’ in relation to Arbitration Agreements in an article written in 1974 (La clause d’arbitrage pathologique, Commercial Arbitration Essays in Memoriam Eugenio Minoli, UTET 1974). Mr Eisemann stated that a ‘pathological clause’ was one that was so badly written that it could be invalidated and therefore futile.

He went on to state four criteria that must be met to ensure a clause in an Arbitration Agreement is effective.

A clause should:

• Produce mandatory consequences for the parties.
• Exclude the intervention of state courts in the settlement of the dispute.
• Give powers to the arbitrators to resolve the disputes likely to arise between the parties.
• Permit a procedure which leads, under the best conditions of efficiency and rapidity, to the rendering of an enforceable award.

The Arbitration Agreement is core to successful arbitration and extremely complicated to draft. Therefore, it is essential to have it written by an experienced Arbitration Solicitor who understands the arbitration process and how it applies to your market sector and particular organisation.

What part does a Solicitor play in an Arbitration hearing?

In addition to drafting the Arbitration Agreement, an Arbitration Solicitor plays a significant role before, during, and after the arbitration itself. They will:

• Advise and assist with the selection of Arbitrators (in line with the terms of the Arbitration Agreement).
• Advise on the law governing the arbitration and how this will affect your position.
• Inform you about arbitration costs.
• Gather evidence and witness statements.
• Prepare written submissions that are presented to the Arbitrator.
• Explain the award to you and advise you on enforcement options, including the provisions of international conventions.

Who pays for arbitration costs, including the legal fees?

In England and Wales, parties to an arbitration can agree in advance on how costs are allocated, subject to some exceptions; however, this is rare in practice. The Arbitral Tribunal can award costs.  Section 61(1) of the Arbitration Act  1996 provides that:

“the tribunal may make an award allocating the costs of the arbitration as between the parties, subject to any agreement of the parties.”

It is generally accepted that the Tribunal will award costs unless the parties agree otherwise. In most cases, arbitrations are conducted by the parties and Tribunal on the basis that the Tribunal will make an award dealing with the allocation of costs.

Final words

Domestic and International commercial disputes are by nature complex and often involve multiple claims and counter-claims. Arbitration provides a straightforward, confidential way of resolving matters. An Arbitration Solicitor will advise you on a strategy before Arbitration proceedings, markedly increasing your chances of a successful outcome and preserving necessary commercial relationships.

To discuss any points raised in this article, please call us on +44 (0) 203972 8469 or email us at mail@eldwicklaw.com.

Note: The points in this article reflect sanctions in place at the time of writing, 12 April 2024. This article does not constitute legal advice. For further information, please contact our London office.

What are the key rules of LCIA Arbitration?

If you plan to commence arbitration in the LCIA, you must be aware of the following:

• The appointment of Arbitrators is by the LCIA Court; however, parties can agree to make a nomination.
• There is a presumption in favour of a sole Arbitrator.
• A Tribunal can be quickly put together or an emergency Arbitrator appointed if required.
• Arbitrations can be consolidated in certain circumstances.
• Early determination of claims/counterclaims/issues are available.
• Security for claims and costs is available.
• Appeal rights are waived unless otherwise agreed.
• Costs are calculated without regard to disputed amounts.
• There are staged advance payments for costs.
• Proceedings and awards are confidential.

What do Claimants and Defendants need to do before the LCIA Arbitration?

The following is a step-by-step guide to bringing an arbitration in the LCIA:

Claimants

1. Check the arbitration provisions in the contract to see if there is a clause covering LCIA arbitration. Also check any clause amendments which may cover the selection of an Arbitrator, the type of dispute that can be referred to arbitration, and rights of appeal.
2. Check that the claim is not statutory or contractually time-barred.
3. Consider whether interim provisions are required to protect your position, for example a freezing injunction.
4. Begin case preparation, including locating documents and identifying those that are privileged, collecting witness statements, and retaining an expert witness.
5. If the clause allows parties to nominate an Arbitrator, identify someone you prefer and have funds available for advance payments of their costs.

Respondent

1. Check the Arbitration Agreement to ensure the dispute that has led to the claim falls within the Agreement’s scope. If there is a potential jurisdictional issue, you will need to prepare your challenge.
2. Identify potential counter claims or cross claims.
3. Examine the claim to see if it is time-barred.
4. Apply for interim measures such as security for costs.
5. Prepare your defence case.

To book a meeting with our lawyers, please call us on +44 (0) 203972 8469 or email us at mail@eldwicklaw.com.

Our LCIA-experienced arbitrators

• Waleed Tahirkheli
  wt@eldwicklaw.com
  +447903733137
• Jenna Kruger
  jk@eldwicklaw.com
  +4402038755629

Who do I contact in the LCIA?

Prior to the Tribunal being formed, all communications should be sent to the Registrar and the other party must be copied in unless the matter is purely administrative.

An Arbitrator who is participating in the selection of the Presiding Arbitrator can consult with any party to gain insights into the candidate’s suitability.

Unless the Tribunal decides otherwise, once the Tribunal is formed, all communications must take place between the parties and the Tribunal, with the Registrar copied in.

How is arbitration commenced?

To commence an Arbitration, the Claimant must serve a Request for Arbitration along with the prescribed fee. The Respondent serves their Response and the Tribunal is then appointed.

The Request and Response set out:

1. The dispute/s to be arbitrated, and
2. The parties’ respective cases.

How is the award made?

Article 15.10 of the LCIA Rules 2020 provides that the Tribunal:

“shall seek to make its final award as soon as reasonably possible and shall endeavour to do so no later than three months following the last submission from the parties (whether made orally or in writing), in accordance with a timetable notified to the parties and the Registrar as soon as practicable (if necessary, as revised and re-notified from time to time). When the arbitral tribunal (not being a sole arbitrator) establishes a time for what it contemplates should be the last submission from the parties (whether written or oral), it shall set aside adequate time for deliberations (whether in person or otherwise) as soon as possible after that last submission and notify the parties of the time it has set aside.”

The award will be made in writing and set out the reasons for the Arbitrator/s decision. Separate awards can be made at different times concerning dissimilar matters.

In summary

Commencing arbitration in the LCIA requires a thorough knowledge of the rules and guidance, especially when the issues are related to cross-border matters. Instructing an experienced Arbitration Solicitor will ensure the process runs smoothly and your best interests are protected.

To book a meeting with our Lawyers, please call us on +44 (0) 203972 8469 or email us at mail@eldwicklaw.com.

Note: The points in this article reflect sanctions in place at the time of writing, 2^nd May 2024. This article does not constitute legal advice. For further information, please contact our London office.

What is the Fixed Costs Regime? 

The fixed recoverable costs (FRC) regime sets the amount of legal costs that the winning party can claim back from the losing party in civil litigation. 

In proceedings today, it is not uncommon for costs to amount to nearly the same or exceed any sum awarded by a court. The purpose of the regime is to give parties certainty about the maximum amount that the losing party will have to contribute to the winning party’s costs. 

The New Fixed Costs Regime October 2023

Previously, under the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR), the FCR regime only applied to road traffic accident cases with up to £10,000 in damages. For all other cases, the amount recoverable depended on what the winner’s lawyers charge and whether the court deemed those charges to be reasonable and proportionate, considering the value and complexity of the case. 

However, since the implementation of the new regime under CPR 45 and PD 45, which came into effect on 1 October 2023, the regime is now extended to all types of civil proceedings valued at less than £100,000 allocated to the fast and intermediate tracks, that are issued on or after 1 October 2023. 

There are exceptions to this general rule including: 

• particularly complex cases allocated to the multi-track;
• if a party is protected by CPR r.45.1(6);
• personal injury claims where the cause of action accrues before 1 October 2023; and
• residential housing claims (although this may change with new legislation in 2025). 

Effect of the New Fixed Costs Regime

Under the new regime, the maximum costs the losing party will be liable to pay will be fixed at the rates set in the tables at PD 45 of the CPR. 

In determining these rates, the court will assign the case to a complexity band, labelled 1 to 4 in ascending order of complexity. The more complex the case, the higher the band it will be assigned to, and the greater the fixed costs applicable to the case. 

In deciding the band into which the dispute falls, consideration will be had for the nature of the claim, the amount in dispute, the legal complexity, the number of parties, and the expected duration of the hearing. 

There are also certain cases in which the new FCR regime is applied but costs greater than the FRC can be awarded such as where vulnerable parties or witnesses have resulted in additional work leading to costs 20% above the FRC. 

How Does The New Fixed Costs Regime Affect Disputes? 

At first blush, the new regime may appear to be a welcome change to litigants as it provides an additional degree of certainty as regards adverse costs. 

However, it is important to remember that only the recoverable costs are fixed, not what lawyers charge for representing a party in the proceedings. Any shortfall between the recoverable costs and the amount charged by lawyers remains the winner’s liability. 

This liability will also be greater as the introduction of complexity bands potentially creates and additional procedural step for which parties will have to determine their applicable band and make representations if their assigned band is disputed. 

Arbitration Agreements to agree on costs liabilities 

Since the introduction of the new FCR regime, parties are seeking alternative methods to resolve their dispute which allows them to keep in control of their costs. 

Unsurprisingly, parties are turning towards arbitration as a method that is more cost-effective and allows the parties to agree terms on costs liabilities. 

To ensure arbitration is available when a dispute arises, parties need to enter into an Arbitration Agreement. 

International businesses across the world are including arbitration agreements as boilerplate clauses in all their standard contracts. However, there are still many who don’t and end up incurring significant costs when a dispute ultimately arises. 

As such, the best approach parties can take to maintain control over their costs is to draft a clear arbitration clause into their contract. 

An effective Arbitration Agreement should be in writing and include the following non-exhaustive provisions: 

• The seat of the arbitration 
• The governing law 
• The nature of the dispute under the agreement 
• The inarbitrability of specific agreements under the chosen law and elected by the parties 
• Whether the arbitration is to be ad hoc or institutional
• The number of arbitrators in the tribunal 
• The language of the proceedings
• Specifying any opt-out provisions. 

The decisions a business makes on each of these points will have consequences on future arbitrations, so it is essential that expert advice is sought. A poorly drafted, unclear Arbitration Agreement will only result in additional delay and costs. 

At Eldwick Law, our expert lawyers can assist in drafting an Arbitration Agreement that suits your business needs and will draw upon their experience in arbitration proceedings to mitigate potential issues arising in the future. 

For more information on how Eldwick Law can assist you, or to arrange a consultation, please contact our London office.

Contact Us