The ability of customers to transfer their numbers between communications providers on fixed electronic communications networks when they switch their communications provider.

Prices established by averaging the costs of network elements across the country so that customers in different areas of the country do not pay different rates.

Law360, London: The threat of further geopolitical instability is the biggest headache that aviation insurers anticipate over the next five years (2025–30), according to a survey published on 25 June 2025.

Law360: Geopolitical instability is now a permanent feature of the shipping industry that marine insurers must get used to, a marine mutual insurer has said.

NOTE—to see whether notification thresholds in Georgia and throughout the world are met, see Where to Notify. 1. Have there been any recent developments regarding the Georgia merger control regime and are any updates/developments expected in the coming year? Are there any other ‘hot’ merger control issues in Georgia? Merger control in Georgia is governed by the Law of Georgia on Competition (Competition Act). Over the course of 2025, several revisions have been made to the Georgian merger control framework, primarily through amendments to Decree No. 39 of the Head of the Competition Agency on the Notification of Concentrations (Decree 39). These developments include the following: • the recent amendment to Article 3(1) of Decree 39 introduces a more precise formulation of the criteria for determining when a concentration must be notified to the Competition Agency; importantly, the substantive notification thresholds remain unchanged, and the amendment is intended to clarify and streamline the existing wording rather than to modify notification obligations • the calculation of combined turnover was clarified under Article 4(3)(b); in particular: ◦ the previous reference

The revolutionary path travelled by a satellite in which the satellite travels in sync with the Earth’s motion, so that it appears stationary in the sky. A stationary antenna located on Earth can remain pointed at the satellite at all times.

A satellite whose circular and direct orbit lies in the plane of the Earth’s equator and which remains fixed relative to the earth.

Arbitration analysis: The German Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof, FCJ) held that Russian parties remain exempt from providing security for costs in German proceedings under Article 17 of the 1954 Hague Convention on Civil Procedure. The court confirmed that neither Russia’s invasion of Ukraine nor the EU’s sanctions regime affect this treaty‑based procedural protection. In particular, the FCJ found that the EU’s ‘no claims’ sanction mechanism (Art. 11 para. 1 of Regulation (EU) 833/2014) does not extend to procedural rights such as the procedural exemption from providing security for costs. The FCJ further held that difficulties in enforcing cost awards are irrelevant under Section 110(2) No. 1 of the German Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO), which turns solely on the continued existence of Germany’s international treaty obligation. For practitioners, the decision confirms that security for costs in enforcement and related proceedings remains a question of formal treaty continuity, not of sanctions policy, reciprocity or practical enforceability—entrenching a structural asymmetry in disputes involving Russian parties. Written by Annekathrin Schmoll, associate attorney at Gibson Dunn & Crutcher and Katharina Heinrich, associate attorney at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher.

Arbitration analysis: The German Federal Court of Justice recently confirmed that an arbitration clause remains valid even if associated procedural rules may violate German law, specifically German law on general terms and conditions. The court applied the principle of severability, deciding that a potentially invalid procedural provision does not affect an otherwise valid arbitration clause. The court further stated that it is a matter for the arbitral tribunal to decide on the validity of such exclusion as a question of substantive law. However, the court noted that the arbitral tribunal’s assessment would later be subject to state court scrutiny during the enforcement proceedings of the final award (potential violation of German ordre public). The court also dealt with procedural issues concerning section 1032, paragraph 2 applications—a special feature of German law often mentioned in the context of anti-arbitration injunctions. Written by Lucie Gerhardt, associated partner at Noerr PartGmbB, Frankfurt am Main.

Arbitration analysis: The case involved a Deutsche Telekom AG seeking enforcement of an award it had received against India under the 1995 Germany-India BIT. The German Federal Court of Justice held that the European Court of Justice’s (ECJ) rulings in Achmea (Case C-284/16, 6 March 2018) and Komstroy (Case C-741/19, 2 September 2021) that Articles 267 and 344 TFEU preclude intra-EU BIT arbitrations do not extend to extra‑EU disputes. In an attempt to prevent enforcement, India had argued that the EU law defense also applies to extra‑EU BITs. Written by Dr Annekathrin Schmoll, associate attorney at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP and Charlotte Popp (LL.M., Columbia), trainee lawyer at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP.

The German Federal Ministry of Justice has published draft legislation to modernise arbitration law. The aim of the draft Bill is to improve Germany's appeal as a place for dispute resolution. The draft Bill highlights proposed changes to arbitration law, including freeform arbitration agreements in commercial transactions, publication of arbitration awards, video hearings and electronic arbitration awards and changes to proceedings before state courts which are connected to arbitration proceedings. Interested parties can comment on the draft Bill until 14 March 2024.

This article, written by Dr Anette Gärtner, Nils Müller and Jannick Thonemann of Eversheds Germany, explores the end of DABUS saga by an order of the German Federal Supreme Court and its impact.