Arbitration in Qatar—the background Governing legislation and approach to arbitration Qatari jurisprudence on arbitration entered a phase of important evolution since 2017. Legislators developed a new arbitration law, largely based on the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration (UNCITRAL Model Law), and consulted the international legal community for their input. Law No 2 of 2017 Promulgating the Civil and Commercial Arbitration Law (Qatari Arbitration Law) was issued in February 2017, published in the Official Gazette in March 2017, and entered into force in April 2017. The Qatari Arbitration Law applies to all arbitration proceedings in Qatar. Since the Qatari Arbitration Law is based on the UNCITRAL Model Law, the way arbitration works does not differ much from other jurisdictions. Since Arabic is the official language of the State of Qatar, most of its laws are only officially published in the Arabic language. In this instance, however, the Qatar International Court and Dispute Resolution Centre (QICDRC) was granted the authority to translate the Arabic text of the Qatari Arbitration

This Practice Note offers an introduction to arbitration in Scotland under the Arbitration (Scotland) Act 2010 (A(S)A 2010) and related matters. This Practice Note focuses on the differences between the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996) in England, Wales and (separately) Northern Ireland (England and English are used as a convenient shorthand) and A(S)A 2010. For an introduction to AA 1996, see Practice Note: A guide to the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996). Background to A(S)A 2010 The law of Scotland (‘Scots law’) developed separately from that of England and Wales. The roots of Scots law are found in customary law, canon (church) law and Roman law, imported to Scotland during the late medieval period when Scottish legal professionals returned from studying in the Netherlands and other continental European countries. Following the union of the Scottish and English parliaments in 1707, a common parliament has made laws for Scotland and England. However, the Scottish legal system has retained its separate identity with its own laws and courts. In the sphere of commercial law, it is

This Practice Note provides an introduction to arbitration in Thailand. Note: Thai court judgments referred to in this Practice Note are not reported by LexisNexis® UK. Arbitration in Thailand—the legislative framework The Arbitration Act 2002 (B.E. 2545) (AA 2002) governs all arbitrations seated in Thailand, both domestic and international. AA 2002 is based substantially on the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Model Law (the Model Law), but with some minor differences, including that: • under AA 2002, s 23, arbitrators may face civil liability for performing their duties if they performed wilfully and grossly negligently causing damage to any of the parties • under AA 2002, s 23, arbitrators who demand or accept benefits without lawful justification are subject to criminal penalties and civil liabilities • the Model Law does not address arbitrators’ liability, and • AA 2002, s 15, states explicitly that a government agency and a private party may agree to settle their contractual dispute by arbitration, irrespective of whether or not the contract is an administrative contract Relevant arbitral bodies in Thailand The

Banking & Finance analysis: Professor Dr Klaus Peter Berger, (KPB) Director of the Institute for Banking Law and Centre for Transnational law (CENTRAL) at the University of Cologne and P.R.I.M.E. Finance Expert, and P.R.I.M.E. Finance Head of Secretariat, Camilla Macpherson (CM), discuss a new project on arbitration in banking and finance led by Professor Berger.

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. Practice Note: Intra-EU investment disputes—an introduction may be of interest to practitioners. The use by investors of intra-EU bilateral investment treaties (BITs) has been the source significant debate in recent years. The debate highlights a tension between the rights and protections established by EU law and those provided for in BITs between Member States. This Practice Note summarises the key developments in arbitration in this important area. A number of European institutions, notably the European Commission and the European Court of Justice (ECJ), have taken the view that intra-EU BITs are incompatible with EU law. Unsurprisingly, these concerns have garnered little support in the arbitration world to date. However, following the Slovakia v Achmea, decision (discussed below) and the declarations made by all EU Member States in January 2019 regarding the termination of intra-EU BITs (discussed below), the views of the European institutions have won the political argument and intra-EU BIT disputes—at least in their current form—will soon become a

Sources of arbitration law in the Isle of Man The Isle of Man (‘IOM’) is a self-governing British Crown Dependency, with a constitutionally separate parliament, government, and judiciary. The Manx parliament is called ‘Tynwald’, and statute passed by the same is referred to as an Act of Tynwald. Unless otherwise specified references to legislation in this practice note are to Acts of Tynwald. Similarly, references to ‘the Court’ are to the Courts of Justice of the Isle of Man. The key Manx legislation relating to arbitration is: • Arbitration Act 1976 • Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) (Isle of Man) Act 1968 • Rules of the High Court of Justice 2009 General features of arbitration in the IOM Part I of the Arbitration Act 1976 contains general provisions as to arbitration on the IOM. An ‘arbitration agreement’ is defined as a written agreement to submit present or future differences to arbitration, whether an arbitrator is mentioned therein or not. The authority of an arbitrator appointed by an arbitration agreement is irrevocable

Arbitration analysis: Our panel of experts examines the key developments in 2014 and takes a look at what 2015 might hold for arbitration.

This Practice Note provides an introduction to the use of arbitration as a method of dispute resolution for disputes in the energy sector. This Practice Note should be read in conjunction with the following Practice Notes: • Starting a claim in an energy dispute—a practical guide • Oil and gas projects—contracts and disputes • Oil and gas disputes—international dispute resolution framework and institutions Energy sector disputes Energy projects, whether in fossil fuels, nuclear, or renewable energies such as hydro, wind, geothermal, solar and tidal power, are characterised by capital-intensive and complex deals of typically large volumes. Transactions and investments are usually long-term in nature and frequently involve participants from different countries and cultural backgrounds. There are numerous types of dispute prevalent in the energy sector. They may manifest between project partners (including state actors), with lenders, with contractors in a supply chain, or other third parties. The disputes themselves can concern a wide range of issues—for example, joint venture disputes, expropriation, environmental issues, financing, pricing reviews, construction

Arbitration analysis: Throughout the course of an international commodity transaction there are many legal issues and potential disputes that can arise as the commodity crosses multiple jurisdictional boundaries and goes through many hands in the journey from producer to end user. Given the international nature of commodity markets, it is usual for the contracts involved to incorporate arbitration clauses. This analysis considers the types of disputes arising from the sale of commodities, the disruption to the LNG market brought about by the Russian war, and coverage of prospective types of disputes in the new metals market. Analysis written by Amanda Lees, partner at King & Wood Mallesons.

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. Introduction The purpose of this Practice Note is to give a concise overview of the arbitration landscape in the Territory of the Virgin Islands (the ‘BVI’). For context, the BVI is a British Overseas Territory. It has its own constitution (the Virgin Islands Constitution Order 2007, which replaced the Virgin Islands Constitution Order 1976), its own legislature which enacts laws, and its own system of government. The law of the UK forms part of the law of the BVI where it is directly imported or where it forms part of the common law (Common Law Declaration of Application Act (Cap 13), section 2). Note: the cases referred to below are reported by LexisNexis® The legislative framework The BVI's first arbitration legislation was the Arbitration Act 1976 (the ‘1976 Act’). The 1976 Act was never amended or revised from its enactment

The Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce has joined 15 other international arbitration institutions in requesting that the European Commission refine its draft guidance on the classification of high-risk artificial intelligence (AI) systems under the EU AI Act. In a joint letter the signatories state that any high-risk obligations in the arbitration context should attach to AI systems used by, or on behalf of, an arbitral tribunal in its adjudicative function, rather than to systems used by arbitral institutions for administrative or organisational support. The letter further states that the Commission should revisit its description of investment dispute bodies, on the basis that such tribunals ordinarily resolve disputes between investors and host States, not disputes between businesses and that the final guidance should distinguish clearly between tribunal adjudication and institutional administration.

Arbitration analysis: An agreement varying a litigation funding agreement contained a clause providing that any party shall be entitled to resolve a dispute by referring it to a KC who would be instructed to provide a final and binding opinion. The court held that the claimant did not have a good arguable case that the clause was an arbitration agreement, and the court could not, therefore, appoint an arbitrator pursuant to section 18 of the Arbitration Act 1996. Written by Jennifer Haywood, barrister, arbitrator and mediator at Serle Court.