Case studies

"It really is saving us a huge number of hours over the days, weeks and months. Having more relevant support at hand, not having to draft or review documents them from scratch - it all adds up."

Southampton FC

Access all 29 documents on London Court of International Arbitration

GET ACCESS NOW

GLOSSARY

London Court of International Arbitration definition

/ləʊndon:/ /kɔːt//ɒv,(ə)v/ /ɪntəˈnaʃ(ə)n(ə)l/ /ɑːbɪˈtreɪʃ(ə)n/

Published by a LexisNexis Arbitration expert

What does London Court of International Arbitration mean?

The London Court of International Arbitration, on arbitral institution, based in London, England. LCIA arbitrations are administered and conducted pursuant to the LCIA Arbitration Rules. The institution also provides services for ad hoc arbitrations.

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.

Law of the arbitration proceedings—curial law or lex arbitri (England and Wales)

Law of the arbitration proceedings—curial law or lex arbitri (England and Wales) STOP PRESS: This Practice Note has been updated in light of the new Arbitration Act 2025 and contains reference to amended provisions in the Arbitration Act 1996. For further information on when the new act comes into force see Practice Note: When will the Arbitration Act 2025 come into force? This Practice Note considers the procedural law of arbitration proceedings and how it is determined under the law of England and Wales (England and English are used as convenient shorthand). The procedural law of the arbitral proceedings The procedural law of an arbitration is also called the 'lex arbitri' or the 'curial law'. It provides the framework for the internal procedure of the arbitration itself and the power of the courts supervising and supporting the arbitration. The detail of how an arbitration is to be proceeded is usually determined by any applicable arbitration rules, the procedural orders of the tribunal, and the parties' agreement. The curial law can,...

Jurisdiction agreements—asymmetric jurisdiction agreements

Jurisdiction agreements—asymmetric jurisdiction agreements This Practice Note considers asymmetric jurisdiction agreements. It explains what an asymmetric jurisdiction clause is and provides examples of clauses used in contracts. It considers the compatibility of asymmetric jurisdiction clauses with Article 25 and Article 31 of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast) and, in doing so, also considers decisions of the French court. For guidance on other types of jurisdiction agreement, namely exclusive and non-exclusive jurisdiction clauses, see Practice Notes: • Jurisdiction agreements—exclusive jurisdiction agreements • Jurisdiction agreements—non-exclusive jurisdiction agreements What is an asymmetric jurisdiction clause? Asymmetric jurisdiction clauses (also known as unilateral non-exclusive, hybrid or one-way choice of court agreements) are a specific type of jurisdiction clause used when the parties to the contract have different requirements as to which courts should have jurisdiction to determine a dispute under the contract. Asymmetric clauses typically provide that one party may only bring proceedings in the courts of a specified jurisdiction while the other party may bring proceedings in any court...

Discover our 9 Practice Notes on London Court of International Arbitration

Copyright assignment—pro-assignor

Copyright assignment—pro-assignor This Agreement is dated [insert date] Parties 1 [insert name] [of OR a company incorporated in [England and Wales] under number [insert registered number] whose registered office is at] [insert address] (Assignor); and 2 [insert name] [of OR a company incorporated in [England and Wales] under number [insert registered number] whose registered office is at] [insert address] (Assignee) (each of the Assignor and the Assignee being a party and together the Assignor and the Assignee are the parties). Background (A) The Assignor is the [author AND/OR exclusive] proprietor of certain rights in the [insert description, eg literary] works. (B) The Assignee is [insert description of the Assignee’s background/background to assignment or relevant transaction]. (C) The Assignor agrees to assign its rights in such works to the Assignee and the Assignee agrees to accept the assignment in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. The parties agree: 1 Definitions and interpretation 1.1 In this Agreement: Affiliate • means any entity that directly or...

Equipment hire agreement—pro-supplier

Equipment hire agreement—pro-supplier This Agreement is made on [date ] Parties 1 [insert name of supplier] [of OR a company incorporated in [England and Wales] under number [insert registered number] whose registered office is at] [insert address] (Supplier); and 2 [insert name of Customer] [of OR a company incorporated in [England and Wales] under number [insert registered number] whose registered office is at] [insert address] (Customer), (each of the Supplier and the Customer being a party and together the Supplier and the Customer are the parties). Background (A) The Supplier conducts the business of hiring [insert description of Equipment] to other businesses. (B) The Customer conducts the business of [insert description]. (C) The parties have agreed that the Customer shall hire the Equipment from the Supplier on the terms set out in this Agreement. The parties agree: 1 Definitions and interpretation 1.1 In this Agreement: Affiliate • means any entity that directly or indirectly Controls, is Controlled by, or is under common Control...

Dive into our 17 Precedents related to London Court of International Arbitration

ADGM Court clarifies jurisdiction to grant worldwide freezing orders (A17 v B17, C17 and others)

Arbitration analysis: In a judgment closely following the position adopted by the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) Court of Appeal in Carmon, the Abu Dhabi Global Market (ADGM) Court of First Instance (the ADGMCFI) has ruled that it has the jurisdiction to grant a Worldwide Freezing Order (WFO), not only within the context of court litigation but also in support of actions for the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards under the 2015 ADGM Arbitration Regulations as amended. More specifically, the ADGMCFI confirmed that the ADGMCFI’s jurisdiction was not restricted by personal jurisdiction over the defendants, nor by service of proceedings upon them. It also confirmed its ability to issue a WFO against a person against whom the applicant had no claim, judgment, or prospective judgment (the so-called Chabra jurisdiction). Written by Dr Gordon Blanke, founding principal at Blanke Arbitration, Farhan Shafi, associate at Blanke Arbitration, and Sajid Suleman, barrister at No5 Chambers.

USA—Trust Company can email docs in US$149m Ukraine award dispute

Law360, London: A Manhattan federal judge has granted Madison Pacific Trust Ltd's request to let it serve a petition for the enforcement of a US$149m arbitral award against the founders of a Ukrainian grain exporter via email, finding that their physical whereabouts are unknown.

Read the latest 3 News articles on London Court of International Arbitration