Complex commercial litigation—USA—Q&A guide This Practice Note contains a jurisdiction-specific Q&A guide to complex commercial litigation in USA published as part of the Lexology Getting the Deal Through series by Law Business Research (published: January 2022). Authors: Vinson & Elkins LLP—Christopher Duffy; Marisa Secco Giles; Quentin L Smith; James Leader; Page Robinson 1. How common is commercial litigation as a method of resolving high-value, complex disputes? Commercial litigation is one avenue available to parties that need to resolve high-value, complex disputes. Not all disputes proceed to litigation, however. Sometimes, the parties involved might prefer the status quo or attempted renegotiation of applicable agreements in light of the costs of legal representation, the investment of employee and company time to develop a case, the available forum, and timetable to resolve disputes. Commercial parties who do pursue commercial litigation may still find resolution before trial through mediation or other private settlement. 2. Please describe the culture and ‘market’ for litigation. Do international parties regularly participate in disputes in the court system in your jurisdiction, or do the disputes typically tend to be regional? The culture of litigation will vary slightly depending on the norms and expectations of the lawyers practicing in the forum in which suit is brought, but universally, litigation is adversarial. While the system is designed so that parties may have their 'day in court', applicable rules of evidence and procedure
Singapore International Commercial Court—interim relief Court's powers Any complex legal proceedings involving parties and institutions deriving from different jurisdictions and juridical bases need to be supported with provisions for interim relief, often necessary to preserve the subject matter of the dispute. The Singapore International Commercial Court (SICC) too has the power to issue and enforce interim measures in aid of SICC proceedings. A party seeking interim relief may do so by way of an inter partes interlocutory application or, in urgent cases, by way of ex parte interlocutory application. Inter partes interlocutory applications An inter partes interlocutory application should be filed by way of summons, along with the supporting affidavit(s). The application should be filed, served, delivered or otherwise conveyed to the SICC Registry in accordance with paras 44, 45 or 46 of the Singapore International Commercial Court Practice Directions. The applicant may, at the time of filing the application, indicate a preferred hearing date. Upon filing, the application shall be endorsed by the SICC Registry with a summons number and hearing date, and thereafter returned to the applicant (Singapore International Commercial Court Practice Directions, para 104). Where no hearing date has been indicated on the endorsed summons, the SICC Registry will inform parties of the hearing date subsequently (Singapore International Commercial Court Practice Directions, para 104(4)). The applicant shall serve the application and all supporting affidavits as soon as
Discover our 82 Practice Notes on Forum non conveniens
This week's edition of Insurance & Reinsurance weekly highlights includes: updates relating to the Ukraine conflict, cases and decisions, market practice, regulatory developments, dates for your diary and other news highlights reported over the past week.
Insurance & Reinsurance analysis: The High Court refused to grant a stay as sought by the defendants, ABSA. Proceedings were on foot in both South Africa and England. The case related to coverage under primary, first and excess reinsurance contracts in respect of professional indemnity in South Africa. There were proceedings in relation to the primary reinsurances in both South Africa and (in these proceedings) in England. The plaintiffs, reinsurers, had previously failed on an anti-suit injunction application seeking to restrain ABSA from pursuing the South African proceedings. Following this, ABSA sought to permanently stay the English proceedings in relation to the primary reinsurances and also temporarily stay the excess reinsurance proceedings until the primary reinsurance proceedings were resolved in South Africa. Charles Hollander QC sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court dismissed the application. His Honour said that the application was a forum non conveniens application by another name. Written by Christopher Humby, barrister at Nexus Chambers (Australia).
Read the latest 113 News articles on Forum non conveniens
Speed up all aspects of your legal work with tools that help you to work faster and smarter. Win cases, close deals and grow your business–all whilst saving time and reducing risk.
**Trials are provided to all LexisNexis content, excluding Practice Compliance, Practice Management and Risk and Compliance, subscription packages are tailored to your specific needs. To discuss trialling these LexisNexis services please email customer service via our online form. Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK. We may terminate this trial at any time or decide not to give a trial, for any reason. Trial includes one question to LexisAsk during the length of the trial.
"LexisLibrary gives us the most relevant and recent cases and always has the latest information on them. It makes research so much easier. We're more cost-effective for our clients and more efficient each day"
Access all documents on Forum non conveniens
0330 161 1234