DIFC-LCIA arbitration

Copyright © 2024 LexisNexis

ARCHIVED: This Overview has been archived and is not maintained.

NOTE: The DIFC Arbitration Institute (DAI) was abolished in September 2021 by the ruler of Dubai, with its operations and assets to be merged with the Dubai International Arbitration Centre (DIAC). See: LNB News 20/09/2021 55. On 28 March 2022, DIAC and the LCIA announced that they had agreed terms under which the LCIA would administer cases already registered with the DIFC-LCIA Arbitration Centre from London and DIAC would administer cases registered from 21 March 2022

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Existing user? Sign-in TAKE A FREE TRIAL
Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Arbitration News

High Court of Delhi binds certain non-signatories to an arbitration agreement as veritable parties on account of their substantial and direct involvement in the negotiation and performance of a contract/transaction (KKH Finvest Private Ltd and another v Jonas Haggard and others)

Arbitration analysis: In a decision given in October 2024, the Delhi High Court (DHC) exercised its prima facie jurisdiction under Section 11(5) of the Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act) to partially allow a petition to commence arbitration against certain non-signatories to an arbitration agreement on the basis of the non-signatories’ ‘positive, direct, and substantial’ involvement in the negotiation or performance of the underlying contract containing the arbitration agreement. Accordingly, the DHC found the non-signatories to be veritable parties, leaving the ultimate decision about whether the non-signatories were, in fact, bound by the arbitration agreement to the arbitral tribunal. Written by Juhi Gupta, counsel and Ayan Tandon, associate at Shardul Amarch and Mangaldas & Co.

The French Cour de Cassation upholds validity of ICC tribunal (Devas v Antrix)

Arbitration analysis: The French Cour de Cassation has confirmed the validity of an ICC tribunal in a dispute in which the underlying agreement specified arbitration under ICC or UNCITRAL rules, seated in New Delhi. The Cour de Cassation’s interpretation of the arbitration clause allowed for one party to initiate arbitration under either ICC or UNCITRAL rules without further mutual agreement. The case also touches on the interaction between insolvency proceedings and arbitration. The Cour de Cassation denied the intervention of a liquidator from India, finding that foreign insolvency decisions (such as those appointing a liquidator) do not automatically carry the same weight in France unless they are recognised (exequatur) under French law. Written by Sara Nadeau-Senguin, partner at Teynier Pic, Paris.

FINRA releases latest arbitration and mediation statistics through October 2024

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) has released its latest arbitration and mediation statistics through October 2024. The data reveals a 27% decrease in new case filings compared to 2023, with 2,147 cases filed (65% customer cases, 35% intra-industry). FINRA reports improved efficiency, with 2,639 cases closed and an overall turnaround time reduced to 12.3 months. Customer claimants were awarded damages in 25% of cases decided. Notably, customer claimant success rates varied by hearing type, with 30% awarded damages in regular hearings, 45% in Zoom hearings, and 40% in in-person hearings. Mediation continues to be effective, with 87% of cases settled. These figures suggest a shift in dispute resolution dynamics within the financial industry, potentially reflecting changes in market conditions or regulatory practices.

Equal treatment of government and private parties in arbitration (International Seaport v Kamarajar Port)

Arbitration analysis: This case has a significant bearing on the manner in which the operation and effect of arbitral awards in India are sought to be stayed/set aside. The Supreme Court of India, upon analyzing the framework of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘Act’) concluded that under the Act, the government is not entitled to any exceptional treatment when it comes to the conditions basis which the impugned arbitral award may be stayed, particularly the form of security which may be furnished in lieu of granting a stay. The court observed that the Act is a self-contained code that does not differentiate between parties based on their status of being government or private entities and mandates that they be treated equally, except where otherwise indicated by law. Accordingly, the court observed that the High Court, while staying the arbitral award dated 7 March 2024 (‘Award’), ought not to have based its decision merely on the respondent’s status as a statutory authority. This judgment will dissuade government entities from mounting frivolous challenges to arbitral awards and particularly, seeking that they be stayed, knowing now that they will have to furnish security strictly in the form and manner prescribed under section 36 of the Act to have the award stayed. Written by Ila Kapoor, partner, Ramkrishna Veerendra and Devika Bansal, associates, at Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co.

View Arbitration by content type :  
News
Practice notes
Precedents
Q&As

Popular documents

PCA Rules—the proceedings

PCA Rules—the proceedingsThis Practice Note covers the conduct of proceedings under the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) Arbitration Rules 2012 (the PCA Rules), and sets out the main provisions on how the parties’ arguments and evidence are to be presented, how jurisdictional objections and

UNCITRAL Rules—background and introduction

UNCITRAL Rules—background and introductionThis Practice Note provides an introduction to the overall structure of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law Arbitration Rules (the UNCITRAL Rules). The UNCITRAL Rules occupy an important position in contemporary arbitration practice. The

What does the ICC's scrutiny process involve?

What does the ICC's scrutiny process involve?Scrutiny of an award by the ICC is a major feature of ICC arbitration, see Practice Note: ICC (2012)—the award. The ICC see scrutiny as a means of maximising the legal effectiveness of an award. In practice, however, practitioners often find that scrutiny

DIAC (2022)—costs

DIAC (2022)—costsAs in any arbitration, it is important that the parties understand the costs that are likely to be involved in the case and when they are likely to need to pay those costs. There are two elements to costs:•costs of the arbitration, and•each party’s own legal costsReferences to
PCA Rules—the proceedings

PCA Rules—the proceedings

PCA Rules—the proceedingsThis Practice Note covers the conduct of proceedings under the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) Arbitration Rules 2012 (the PCA Rules), and sets out the main provisions on how the parties’ arguments and evidence are to be presented, how jurisdictional objections and

UNCITRAL Rules—background and introduction

UNCITRAL Rules—background and introduction

UNCITRAL Rules—background and introductionThis Practice Note provides an introduction to the overall structure of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law Arbitration Rules (the UNCITRAL Rules). The UNCITRAL Rules occupy an important position in contemporary arbitration practice. The

What does the ICC's scrutiny process involve?

What does the ICC's scrutiny process involve?

What does the ICC's scrutiny process involve?Scrutiny of an award by the ICC is a major feature of ICC arbitration, see Practice Note: ICC (2012)—the award. The ICC see scrutiny as a means of maximising the legal effectiveness of an award. In practice, however, practitioners often find that scrutiny

DIAC (2022)—costs

DIAC (2022)—costs

DIAC (2022)—costsAs in any arbitration, it is important that the parties understand the costs that are likely to be involved in the case and when they are likely to need to pay those costs. There are two elements to costs:•costs of the arbitration, and•each party’s own legal costsReferences to