Energy arbitration

Energy arbitration

This Overview provides links to practical guidance content on arbitration of disputes in the energy sector. Note that this subtopic does not contain all content relevant to the resolution of energy disputes or energy arbitration, which can be found in the wider content set in the Arbitration and Energy modules.

An introduction to arbitration in the energy sector

This Practice Note provides an introduction to the use of arbitration in the energy sector. It considers: why arbitration is generally the preferred method to resolve disputes in this sector; the types of arbitration typically used to resolve energy disputes; and, some of the notable features of energy arbitrations. For further information, see Practice Note: Arbitration in the energy sector—an introduction.

Starting a claim in an energy dispute—a practical guide

This Practice

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

Hong Kong DoJ selects operators for sports dispute resolution pilot scheme

The Hong Kong Department of Justice (DoJ) has announced that the AALCO Hong Kong Regional Arbitration Centre and the eBRAM International Online Dispute Resolution Centre have been selected as the administering body and technology provider respectively for a two-year pilot scheme on sports dispute resolution. The scheme, part of the government’s policy initiative to promote sports mediation and arbitration in Hong Kong, will provide a structured mechanism for resolving sports-related disputes through mediation and arbitration, supported by dedicated institutional and technological infrastructure. The DoJ, assisted by the Advisory Committee on Sports Dispute Resolution, which includes representatives from the Culture, Sports and Tourism Bureau, the Hong Kong Bar Association and the Law Society of Hong Kong, assessed proposals based on criteria such as institutional expertise, governance, conflict management, training experience and fee structures. Preparatory work will commence immediately, and the pilot scheme will be launched by the end of the year, with further details to follow.

SIAC signs MoU with Chongqing Arbitration Commission

The Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) and the Chongqing Arbitration Commission (CQAC) have signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) to promote international arbitration as a preferred method for resolving international disputes. Under the MoU, SIAC and CQAC will collaborate to organise conferences, seminars, training programmes, workshops and other events related to international arbitration in both China and Singapore. CQAC will offer the use of its hearing facilities at preferential rates for SIAC arbitrations conducted in China, while SIAC will assist on a best efforts basis to arrange bookings of hearing facilities at Maxwell Chambers at preferential rates for CQAC arbitration hearings in Singapore. The MoU was signed on 21 November 2025 in Chongqing, China, during the Second International Commercial Arbitration Forum on the New International Land-Sea Trade Corridor.

AAA introduces AI-led arbitration rules for two-party disputes

The American Arbitration Association (AAA) has introduced AI Led Arbitration Rules establishing a hybrid system where an AI Arbitrator makes preliminary decisions that are reviewed and finalised by human arbitrators. The rules apply to two-party disputes processed through AAA's Digital Dispute Resolution Center platform, with filing costs of $US 2,500 per claim or counterclaim and streamlined submission schedules of ten business days per stage.

Arbitration enforcement: REJA or AA? A clarification by the Federal Court of Malaysia

Arbitration analysis: A determination was made by the Federal Court clarifying that the Reciprocal Enforcement of Judgments Act 1958 (REJA 1985) and the Arbitration Act 2005 (AA 2005) represent distinct and autonomous legislative frameworks. This determination possesses considerable import for legal practitioners specialising in arbitration. It was judicially confirmed that an award creditor is endowed with a strategic election: to pursue the direct enforcement of an arbitral award via the provisions of the AA, or alternatively, to seek enforcement of a ‘confirmation judgment’ procured from a reciprocating jurisdiction by means of REJA. The finding clarifies that the AA does not operate to displace REJA; moreover, the utilisation of the REJA framework does not constitute the practice described as ‘judgment laundering.’ Furthermore, judicial affirmation was given to the applicability of the distinct defences delineated within REJA, in contradistinction to the ‘passive remedies’ available under the AA. Concurrently, a standard of minimal curial review was endorsed, thereby precluding a comprehensive de novo re-hearing concerning matters of jurisdiction or fraud that have been subject to prior adjudication. Written by Ahmad Dzulhaziq bin Ahmad Mahmod, senior legal associate at Messrs Che Mokhtar & Ling.