Arbitration analysis: This case involved an application to Commercial Court of the City of St Petersburg and Leningrad Region (the ‘Russian Court’) to prohibit initiation or continuation of legal proceedings in a foreign court and in the international arbitration, seated outside RF. The claimant, a Russian company, commenced proceedings in the Russian Court against the Respondent for breach of contract, despite the existence of the valid ICC arbitration agreement between the parties. The Respondent obtained an anti-suit injunction from the English court, however, the Russian Court proceeded to uphold the claimant’s claim, and, furthermore, awarded the claimant its application for an anti-suit injunction against the Respondent, as well as ordered the Respondent to pay punitive damages to the claimant. Written by Irina Tymczyszyn FCIArb, arbitrator and counsel, Tymczyszyn Arbitration.

Definitions Awards • means the respective rights to acquire shares granted to each Award Holder as detailed in the Awards Schedule; Award Holders • means the persons whose names appear in the Awards Schedule; and Awards Schedule • means [insert appropriate cross reference to the relevant schedule or other document where full details of the Awards and the Award Holders are listed]. Warranties 1 Share incentives—general 1.1 The Awards are the only subsisting rights to acquire securities or shares in any Group Company. Apart from the Awards, no Group Company employee or officer or consultant or other service provider (or former or proposed employee, officer, consultant or other service provider, or any nominee or associate of any such person) has any contractual right to future grants or awards under any share-based incentive plan, nor any promise that they will be granted any such award. There are also no agreements, arrangements or promises under which any such person may have a right, future entitlement or expectation under any phantom share award or similar right. 1.2 Full and accurate details of the Awards are set out in the Awards Schedule, including, in relation to each Award:

[Insert in para 6.1 of response form ET3] 1 It is [accepted OR denied] that the Claimant was employed by the Respondent as a [insert claimed job title] from [insert date] until [his OR her OR their] resignation on [insert date]. It is [accepted OR denied] that the Respondent is [insert brief description of the nature of the Respondent]. 2 The Respondent denies that the Claimant was [insert details of claims made, eg discriminated against, harassed, victimised or unfairly constructively dismissed], as alleged or at all. [ Jurisdiction ] [Insert details of any jurisdictional defences that the respondent wishes to argue. Sample text is provided at paragraph 3 below.] 3 Other than the constructive dismissal claim, all of the Claimant’s claims have been presented out of time and the tribunal has no jurisdiction to hear them. It is denied that any or all of the acts amount to a continuing act, or that it would be just and equitable to extend time. [ Contractual terms, policies and training ] [Insert details of the Respondent’s response to any background information provided by the Claimant, eg about relevant

This Q&A is based on the assumption that the question is focused on the impact that the disposal of the asset would have on the ability to prove the claim and progress the proceedings through to trial. There are three key areas which could be affected by disposal of the asset: • mitigation of loss • ability to prove the claim, and • actions of the other party Mitigation of loss The extent to which damages may be recoverable for breach of contract is influenced by the following: • the principles of causation and remoteness • the extent to which the claimant has sought to mitigate its loss Even where causation and remoteness have been established (see Practice Note: Causation and remoteness in contractual breach claims) in relation to the loss for which damages are claimed, such damages may yet be reduced if the claimant has failed to mitigate their loss.

It is useful to consider Practice Note: Business-to-consumer digital commerce—compliance and regulation. This Q&A sets out some of the key legal issues to consider when designing and developing an E-commerce website. It is a Q&A which highlights the principal issues under UK law applicable to nearly every website, focusing on the requirements relating to the business information that needs to be displayed, online contract formation, information about goods/services, legal statements, accessibility, intellectual property and privacy. Obligations of an online retailer The Consumer Rights Act 2015 (CRA 2015) and the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013, SI 2013/3134 (CCR 2013) have regulated distance selling of goods and services to consumers within the UK from 1 October 2015 and 13 June 2014 respectively. The CCR 2013 apply to contracts for goods, services and digital content that are made by means of distance communication (and also to doorstep contracts and on-premises contracts).

It is standard for a commercial tenancy agreement to contain provision as to a deposit, as security for the landlord against any breaches of covenant (often, in particular, dilapidations). Parties will often enter into a rent deposit deed which will govern how the deposit is to be held, what deductions can be made from it and often make provision as to any interest earned on the deposit. Alternatively these provisions may be contained in the lease itself, though a separate rent deed facilitates assignment of the lease. There are no specific statutory provisions governing the taking and holding of a commercial rent deposit and the parties are free within the bounds of ordinary contract law to agree such terms as they wish in the rent deposit deed as to interest. A well-drafted rent deposit deed will ordinarily

The Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, and excluding it Tenants who occupy premises themselves for the purposes of a business enjoy protection under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (LTA 1954), subject to certain exceptions. This protection involves a degree of security of tenure, including special formality requirements that the landlord must comply with in order to bring the tenancy to an end. In particular, LTA 1954, s 25 provides for the way in which notice must be given. In this Q&A we have assumed that the effect of the LTA 1954 has been validly excluded. Where the tenancy is to be for a fixed term it is possible for the parties to contract out of the LTA 1954, so that the

Many commercial leases will have the benefit of statutory security of tenure through the application of Part II of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (LTA 1954). The LTA 1954 provides that notwithstanding the expiration of the term of the lease, that lease continues unless terminated through the procedures contained within the LTA 1954. Further, the tenant is entitled as of right to claim a new lease by service of a notice pursuant to LTA 1954, s 26. The landlord can agree or oppose the grant, but opposition can only be raised based on certain specific grounds. In the event that the landlord opposes or the parties cannot agree terms, an application can be made to the court for the grant of a new lease. It is possible to contract out of the provisions of LTA 1954, but this must be done expressly. For a lease of 99 years, which may have commenced prior to the

If there is a licence or contract in place under which a person is entitled to station a caravan on a ‘protected site’ and occupy the caravan as their residence, then the relevant legislation is the Caravan Sites Act 1968 (CSA 1968). A ‘protected site’ is defined as any land in respect of which a site licence is required, not being land in respect of which the relevant planning permission or site licence is expressed to be granted for holiday use only, or is otherwise so expressed or subject to such conditions that there are times of the year when no caravan may be stationed on the land for human habitation. Even if there is no written agreement in place, the terms of the arrangement under which occupation was permitted may be inferred from the conduct of the

The first question to determine is the nature of the daughter’s occupation, in particular whether she is a tenant or licensee or indeed there under some less formal arrangement. It must first be established that there was an intention to create legal relations. While the courts are perhaps slower to conclude that family members intend to create legal relations, there is no presumption against it. An adult daughter who remains with her parents living in her childhood home after turning 18, even in return for a contribution towards food and utility bills, is unlikely to be regarded to have entered into a contract with them. In the present case, the mother is not in occupation. The reasons for this are unclear.

A salary premium is pay in addition to annual salary or an increase in the rate of pay for particular hours, such as night work, in respect of basic hours. There is no statutory requirement to pay a salary premium to night workers and a salary premium does not count towards wages for the purposes of National Minimum Wage pay. A salary premium is therefore an entirely contractual arrangement and an employer’s obligation to pay any such premium will be dependent on the terms of the contract between the employer and worker. Obligations in relation to pregnant employees However, the query indicates that, here, the obligation to move the employee away from night work is a statutory one. Under the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 (MHSW Regs 1999), SI 1999/3242, employers have a general obligation to carry out a risk

The two elements of this question are considered in turn below. Right to bring claims Where a dispute or claim arises in respect of an employee who works wholly or partly abroad and/or has a foreign employer, two questions will need to be determined: • what are the employee’s rights? • where should any litigation that may ultimately arise be adjudicated? In determining these questions, three main issues arise: • applicable law, ie which system of law is applicable to the contract of employment under consideration? • international jurisdiction, ie whose courts and/or tribunals should decide the case? • the territorial scope of relevant applicable or mandatory law, ie how the courts and employment tribunals decide what statutory rights (if any) the employee has, both in terms of: ◦ purely domestic law rights, and ◦ rights derived from EU law For