Effective choice of court clauses (also known as jurisdiction clauses) are central to finance agreements. Reliable, certain process to enforce contractual obligations is essential for cross-border trade and finance transactions. Parties want to be sure that any disputes will be heard not just according to their chosen law but in their chosen forum, and that any judgment obtained can be easily and reliably enforced, including abroad if needed.
Whether you are a regular user of arbitration, a default user of your local courts or pick and choose a forum depending on the deal, it always pays to take a cold look at those choices. Do they still work for you? Will they work in the future when a dispute arises? Have you taken into account developments in law and current best practice?
Today is the day to review your dispute resolution (DR) provisions. Why? We give you 5 good reasons.
With an uptick in commercial wrangles expected as a result of measures taken to combat Covid-19, England is not alone in seeking to provide a welcoming jurisdiction to deal with such disputes.
We identified 6 key developments in arbitration case law in England from the last 6 months. In Part 1 of the two-part post, we explained how:
1. The English Court will determine the applicable law to an arbitration agreement and hold parties to their bargain by enforcing such arbitration agreements …
2. …But only where clearly drafted. The Courts will not save a party from competing clauses.
3. The English Court limits when a non-party can rely on arbitration agreements.