Latham & Watkins

This Practice Note sets out the grounds on which an arbitrator or arbitral tribunal’s substantive jurisdiction can be challenged before the tribunal and in court before an award is made in England and Wales. It discusses the principle of kompetenz-kompetenz (or competence-competence) (ie the tribunal’s power to rule on its own substantive jurisdiction), how to challenge arbitration jurisdiction before the tribunal under section 31 of the English and Welsh Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996) and how to challenge or object to, or seek declarations as to, the tribunal’s substantive jurisdiction before the court under AA 1996, s 32 (section 32 of the English Arbitration Act). A challenge under AA 1996, s 31 must be made not later than the time the relevant party takes their first step in the proceedings to contest the merits of any matter in relation to which they challenge the tribunal’s jurisdiction. Generally, this area of practice may also be referred to as: challenging or challenges to arbitration jurisdiction before the tribunal and in court in England and Wales; challenging an arbitrator’s jurisdiction in arbitration proceedings and in court; tribunal jurisdictional challenges pre-award under the English Arbitration Act; objecting to or objections to substantive jurisdiction before the tribunal and the court; determination of a preliminary point of substantive jurisdiction by the court; application or applying to challenge jurisdiction pre award; and, determining tribunal jurisdiction in arbitral or arbitration proceedings or in court.

This Practice Note sets out the procedure or process for applying to the English and Welsh court under section 32 of the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996) to challenge an arbitrator or arbitral tribunal's substantive jurisdiction prior to an award being issued. This may also be referred to as: challenging or challenges to arbitration jurisdiction in court in England and Wales; challenging an arbitrator’s jurisdiction in court; jurisdictional challenges pre-award under the English Arbitration Act; application or applying to challenge jurisdiction pre award; objecting to or objections to substantive jurisdiction before the court; determination of a preliminary point of substantive jurisdiction; and, determining tribunal jurisdiction in court.

This Practice Note deals with how a party who does not participate in arbitration can challenge the tribunal's jurisdiction under section 72 of the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996). It sets out the grounds for the application and the rights of non-participants to challenge awards. The note covers the process of making the application, including what forms and evidence are required by the court. It also covers the process of responding to a claim of this nature and issues of case management.

This Practice Note considers anti-suit injunctions (or ASI(s)) issued or ordered by the English courts in the context of, or in support of, arbitration proceedings, and how and when they might be used to restrain breaches of an arbitration agreement. Anti-suit relief is sometimes referred to as a remedy for breach of an arbitration agreement or restraining breach of an arbitration agreement. The Practice Note provides details of the court's jurisdiction to grant such an injunction under section 44 of the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996) and section 37 of the Senior Courts Act 1981 (SCA 1981) and the relationship between those provisions. The Practice Note also gives information about the scope of an injunction (if granted) and the court's approach to issuing ASIs. The Practice Note also gives details of how to apply for an anti-suit injunction and what to do in the event of a breach of the injunction.

This Practice Note provides practical guidance on the use of statements of case and memorials exchanged by parties in international arbitration proceedings (sometimes referred to as pleadings or submissions in international arbitral proceedings). The Practice Note considers the definitions and differences between statements of case and memorial approaches, the relevance of the law of the seat of arbitration, the approach taken under prominent institutional arbitration rules and the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Arbitration Rules, and the relevant strategic considerations when deciding between the different approaches. The Practice Note also provides guidance on the content , structure and drafting of statements of case and memorials in international arbitration.

This Practice Note sets out what unilateral (one-sided or non-mutual or asymmetrical or sole) option clauses are in the context of a dispute resolution (jurisdiction) clause and discusses the advantages and disadvantages of such clauses. The Practice Note also considers how the English courts have interpreted such clauses. This Practice Note should be read in conjunction with Practice Notes: Unilateral option clauses—a practical approach and Types of dispute resolution clauses—ADR. Note: unilateral option clauses are a type of hybrid clause.

This Practice Note sets out the position taken by the court’s of key jurisdictions to unilateral (one-sided or non-mutual or asymmetrical or sole) option clauses. It includes information on law in China, England, France, Germany, Hong Kong, India, Italy, Japan, Malaysia, Russia, Singapore, Spain, UAE and the United States (US or USA). Note: unilateral option clauses are a type of hybrid clause.

This Precedent claim form, with accompanying Drafting Notes, is for making an anti-suit injunction application to restrain or discontinue litigation pending the outcome of an arbitration. The claim is made under section 44 of the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996) or section 37 of the Senior Courts Act 1981 (SCA 1981). The format of the application is set out in CPR PD 62.

This is a Precedent order granting an anti-suit injunction application.

This is a precedent witness statement in support of an application for an anti-suit injunction.

This is a precedent confidentiality agreement for use in respect of arbitration proceedings. The purpose of the agreement is to protect the confidentiality of documents and other information produced or exchanged between the parties. It also includes data protection provisions.

This is a Precedent settlement or compromise agreement settling a dispute which is subject to an arbitration agreement. The agreement includes provision for the termination of the arbitral proceedings and for the settlement agreement to be recorded in a Final Award by Consent by the arbitral tribunal, confirming the dismissal of the arbitration and making the agreement enforceable as an arbitral award. It covers costs, including liability for any outstanding arbitrators’ fees, confidentiality, and other standard provisions. A model consent award is annexed as a schedule.