Costs

Costs

Costs in arbitration under the AA 1996 in England and Wales

This Practice Note considers how costs are dealt with under the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996) including the tribunal’s powers in respect of costs and how costs are dealt with in an arbitral award. The Practice Note also covers the extent to which costs awards can be appealed and provides practical tips on dealing with costs in arbitration. It also considers conditional fee arrangements in arbitration. For more information, see Practice Note: AA 1996—costs.

Security for costs granted by the tribunal under the AA 1996 in England and Wales

This Practice Note considers the arbitral tribunal’s power to order the claimant to pay security for costs under AA 1996 and the approach taken by arbitrators when faced with an application for security for costs by a defendant (or defendant to a counter-claim). For more information, see Practice Note: AA 1996—security for costs—the tribunal.

Security for costs granted by the courts under the AA 1996 in England and Wales (s 70(6))

This Practice Note sets out the court’s powers to order

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

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest Arbitration News

ICC reappointed by ICANN to administer domain name dispute resolution

The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) has reappointed the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) to administer disputes relating to generic Top-Level Domain (gTLD) registrations. The ICC International Centre for ADR will oversee proceedings under its Expert Rules and ICANN procedures, with the new gTLD application window opening in April 2026. The appointment covers both first instance and appeal proceedings, with the Centre currently updating its Expert Rules to include a new appendix on financial aspects of proceedings.

ICCA launches consultation on Kigali edition of arbitration procedural sourcebook

The International Council for Commercial Arbitration (ICCA) has launched a consultation on the Kigali Special Edition 2025 of its Drafting Sourcebook for Logistical Matters in Procedural Orders. This edition, launched alongside the ICCA-KIAC Rwanda Conference, forms part of ICCA’s ongoing initiative to provide practical drafting tools for arbitration practitioners. The Sourcebook comprises model clauses addressing logistical issues in arbitral proceedings, which are not covered by arbitration rules or legislation. It has been developed by a globally representative Drafting Committee to broaden access to procedural drafting resources. The feedback received will inform the next version of the Sourcebook, scheduled for presentation at the ICCA Congress in Madrid in 2026. The consultation closes on 31 July 2025.

LCIA publishes 2024 casework report showing growth in international arbitration

The London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA) has published its 2024 Annual Casework Report showing 362 referrals, with 318 under LCIA Rules. The report reveals 95% of cases were international, spanning 101 jurisdictions, with Kenya, the United States, Switzerland, UAE and Russia as top users. Transport and commodities led sectoral distribution at 29%. The report highlights lower costs compared to other institutions, particularly for disputes exceeding $100m, and increased use of procedural mechanisms including 19 expedited/emergency applications and 40 consolidation requests.

Anti-suit injunction in support of arbitration (CMC v (1) DOW (2) MB)

Arbitration analysis: The Singapore International Commercial Court (SICC) granted an anti-suit injunction (ASI) to restrain foreign proceedings seeking to challenge a decision by an arbitral tribunal. The seat of the arbitration was Singapore, and the Singapore courts had exclusive jurisdiction to determine any such challenge. The court summarised the principles applicable to the issue of ASIs and concluded that the requirements for an ASI were met and there was no good reason not to grant it. Although the defendant was linked to a foreign government, it did not enjoy sovereign immunity because it was a ‘separate entity’ and the contract was a ‘commercial transaction’. Written by Rob Palmer, partner, Shi Jin Chia, senior associate, and Hugo Petit, associate, at Hogan Lovells.