Issue 10

Aug 2016

In this issue we feature the topical issues of ‘fair play’ and bias in arbitration and adjudication.

We also look at the Permanent Court of Arbitration’s (PCA’s) award in the South China Sea case in which the Tribunal rejected China’s claim to historic rights over all of the South China Sea as without any foundation in international law, the PCA’s award in the Philip Morris case in which the Tribunal declined to exercise jurisdiction in the matter, the English High Court’s approach to ruling on the jurisdiction of an arbitral tribunal, how the Hong Kong Court of Appeal recently dealt with the penalties rule; and more.

  • Arbitral tribunal issues landmark decision in the South China Sea case – Volterra Fietta, London
  •  Arbitration: Reasonable opportunity to present case, Albert Monichino, Australia
  • Fair Play – Bias in Arbitration and Adjudication – Kate A Corby & Benjamin Levitt, London
  • Apparent Judicial Bias – a hard argument to win? – Daniel Kalderimis, Auckland, NZ
  • English High Court refuses to determine the existence of a disputed arbitration clause prior to the commencement of arbitration proceedings  – Chris Parker & James Allsop, London
  • CASE IN BRIEF – Drake City Ltd v Tasman-Jones – Sarah Redding, NZDRC
  • Philip Morris Asia Limited (Hong Kong) v. The Commonwealth of Australia: Permanent Court of Arbitration Tribunal Publishes Redacted Version of Award on Jurisdiction and Admissibility – Steven Nelson & Michael Robbins, USA/Hong Kong
  • Hong Kong Court of Appeal takes a practical view on the penalties rule upholding a liquidated damages clause – Gareth Thomas, Dominic Geiser & Priya Aswani, London
Skip to content