Brexit

ARCHIVED: This Overview has been archived and is not maintained.

On exit day (ie 11:00 pm on 31 January 2020, as defined in section 20 of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018, the UK ceased to be an EU Member State and lost its entitlement to participate in the political institutions and governance structures of the EU. In accordance with the transitional arrangements provided in Part 4 of the Withdrawal Agreement, exit day marked the commencement of an 11-month implementation period during which the UK was treated by the EU as a Member State for many purposes.

The implementation period ran until 11 pm on 31 December 2020, a point known as IP completion day (as defined in section 39 of the European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Act 2020. During that period, the UK was obliged to adhere to its obligations under EU law (including EU treaties, legislation, principles and international agreements), and submit to the continuing jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the European Union

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

Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Arbitration News

First Hong Kong case to consider restraining offshore winding up proceedings in favour of Hong Kong arbitration following the Re Guy Lam and Sian Participation saga (Hyalroute v ICBC)

Arbitration analysis: In this case, the Hong Kong Court dismissed an anti-suit injunction application seeking to restrain winding-up proceedings in the Cayman Islands, holding that such proceedings did not breach the arbitration clause in the parties’ agreement. The court found that the Cayman petition did not ‘finally resolve’ the dispute and thus fell outside the scope of the arbitration agreement. This decision sidesteps the divergent approaches in Re Guy Lam and Sian Participation, but underscores that the enforceability of arbitration clauses against foreign insolvency actions depends on precise drafting. Practitioners should note the court’s emphasis on the governing law of the foreign proceedings and the interpretation of ‘finally resolved’ as expressed in arbitration clauses. Hong Kong courts should be slow to interfere with the debtor’s home jurisdiction unless a clear breach of an arbitration agreement is shown. The case is a key reference for cross-border insolvency and arbitration practitioners navigating anti-suit relief in common law jurisdictions. Written by Wesley Pang, partner and Head of International Arbitration, Asia, and Aaron Yam, associate, Litigation and Dispute Management, Hong Kong, at Eversheds Sutherland (The authors thank Yuxaun Huang and Karin Yuen for their assistance in preparing this commentary).

View Arbitration by content type :

Popular documents