The following Construction practice note provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering:
ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained.
This article appears as originally published in Construction Law on 1 May 2018 and is not maintained.
Raid Abu-Manneh, Rachael O'Grady and Juliana Castillo of Mayer Brown ask whether new ICC arbitration rules that came into force last year have increased speed, efficiency and transparency.
Overview of effect of changes to ICC Rules which came into effect on 1 March 2017
Analysis of uptake of EPP procedure
Consideration of utility of EPP in construction arbitrations
Assessment of whether new rules have succeeded in increasing speed, efficiency and transparency in arbitration, including construction arbitration
The Note to Parties and Arbitral Tribunals on the Conduct of the Arbitration under the ICC Rules of Arbitration of 30 October 2017
How it has been received and implemented by the arbitration community
The ICC Arbitration Rules of 2017 (the ICC Rules) have now been in force for over a year. In a previous article, we examined the potential impact of the ICC Rules in construction arbitrations and concluded that the improvements made by the ICC contributed to it remaining a competitive arbitral institution before which construction disputes may be resolved.
This article intends to address the implementation of one of the most significant amendments made to the ICC Rules in 2017, as well as the examination of further efforts made
**Trials are provided to all LexisPSL and LexisLibrary content, excluding Practice Compliance, Practice Management and Risk and Compliance, subscription packages are tailored to your specific needs. To discuss trialling these LexisPSL 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.
To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial.
Existing user? Sign-in
Take a free trial
This Practice Note considers the question of when court proceedings can be stayed. It identifies scenarios in which a party may apply for a stay of proceedings, including to allow for: a jurisdictional challenge; arbitration; an attempt to settle; related criminal proceedings; an opportunity to
Brexit: The UK's departure from the EU on exit day ie Friday 31 January 2020 has implications for practitioners dealing with provisions in the CPR relevant to cross border matters, including CPR 5.4C (discussed below). For guidance on the impact of Brexit on the CPR, see Cross border
This Practice Note considers proprietary estoppel from a generic standpoint.For industry specific guidance on proprietary estoppel, see Practice Notes:•Estoppel and property law•Mortgages by estoppelProprietary estoppel—what is it?Unlike the other forms of estoppel (see Practice Note: Estoppel—what,
NOTE: This Practice Note is being reviewed in light of the changes to CPR 81 that will be introduced by the Civil Procedure (Amendment No 3) Rules 2020, SI 2020/747, which is available here. The changes to CPR 81 involve a substitution of the entirety of CPR 81, which will be renamed ‘Part 81
0330 161 1234
To view our latest legal guidance content,sign-in to Lexis®PSL or register for a free trial.