7 October 2020
Disputes Quick Read – 65 of 93 Insights
On 1 October 2020, the London Court of Arbitrations brought in updated rules that modernise the way LCIA arbitrations are conducted and bring the rules into line with current trends.
Overall, we think these are positive changes that will help support the efficient determination of disputes, for the reasons outlined below.
The first notable improvement in the LCIA's rules relates to multi-contract disputes. Following the decision of A v B [2017] EWHC 3417 (Comm), multi-contract disputes couldn't be started in a single process. This was problematic, as disputes between the same parties can often concern multiple independent contracts. Fortunately, the rules now invite parties to address all issues in a single reference, driving efficiency and cost saving.
The rules around the early determination process have also been updated for the better. Tribunals now have the power to expedite proceedings by limiting written statements and witness evidence, and by making early determinations in scenarios where cases are advanced which are "manifestly without merit" or outside the arbitral jurisdiction. Although it's yet to be seen how often these powers will be used, we believe that Tribunals being empowered to dispose of claims quickly in appropriate circumstances is undoubtedly the right call.
Finally, the updated rules acknowledge the use of virtual hearings and electronic communications, both of which have proven vital during the COVID-19 pandemic. While the LCIA has said that the pandemic hasn't instituted a change of focus, it has "allowed the LCIA to address explicitly some changes in good practice". Either way, clearer rules over electronic filings and communication (Article 4), and the express provision for the Tribunal to order a virtual hearing (Article 19), are welcome additions to the framework, in our view.
A more in-depth analysis of the LCIA's updated rules is available here. If you'd like to discuss any of the issues raised in this article in greater detail, please contact a member of our Disputes and Investigations team.
21 March 2024
by Emma Allen, Amy Cheng
14 December 2023
13 December 2023
23 October 2023
by Multiple authors
17 October 2023
12 September 2023
by Tom Charnley
14 August 2023
by Multiple authors
4 August 2023
by Multiple authors
21 July 2023
10 July 2023
1 June 2023
by Multiple authors
3 May 2023
by James Bryden
20 April 2023
by James Bryden
8 March 2023
2 March 2023
14 February 2023
13 February 2023
8 February 2023
19 January 2023
3 October 2022
22 September 2022
by Ben Jones, Emma Allen
9 August 2022
by Nick Maday
25 July 2022
6 July 2022
by Emma Allen
Welcome news for those pursuing fraud claims in the English Courts
28 July 2022
27 July 2022
by Stuart Broom
29 July 2022
17 June 2022
13 June 2022
26 May 2022
31 May 2022
by Multiple authors
4 April 2022
5 April 2022
31 March 2022
by Multiple authors
21 September 2021
by Multiple authors
13 September 2021
6 September 2021
2 August 2021
21 July 2021
15 July 2021
26 May 2021
5 May 2021
21 April 2021
31 March 2021
26 February 2021
by Tim Strong
24 February 2021
20 January 2021
12 January 2021
by Tim Strong
23 November 2020
16 October 2020
23 September 2020
by Multiple authors
7 October 2020
by Nick Storrs
9 April 2020
by Multiple authors
15 April 2020
27 April 2020
by Multiple authors
21 April 2020
11 March 2020
by James Bryden
17 March 2020
by Stuart Broom
26 March 2020
by Multiple authors
26 February 2020
21 February 2020
2 June 2020
16 June 2020
9 July 2020
21 July 2020
3 December 2021
24 November 2021
by Stuart Broom
8 October 2021
10 January 2022
20 January 2022
22 March 2022
7 April 2022
by Multiple authors
by Nick Storrs and Gemma Broughall
by Nick Storrs
The impact of technology on litigation funding
by Laurence Lieberman and Nick Storrs