This Practice Note considers how some of the common challenges which can arise in disputes between multiple parties (multi-party disputes) and/or concerning multiple contracts (multi-contract disputes) may be managed in arbitration proceedings. Such proceedings are sometimes referred to as ‘complex arbitrations’, although that phrase bears other meanings too. Multi-party and multi-contract disputes are common, reflecting the complexity of international commercial transactions. As discussed in Practice Notes: Arbitration—an introduction to the key features of arbitration and Arbitration—new starter guide, arbitration is, typically, a private, contractual method of dispute resolution, which offers parties meaningful control over who determines their dispute and the procedure that will be followed. Indeed, the ability to influence how proceedings will be structured and conducted is one of the commonly-cited reasons why parties—particularly commercial entities involved with cross-border transactions and/or projects—choose arbitration over, say, litigation in national courts. In contrast to resolving a dispute between two parties arising out of a single agreement, the presence of multiple parties and/or multiple contracts may present challenges both when drafting dispute resolution mechanisms and when disputes arise. Multi-contract

This Practice Note contains practical guidance on the multi-party interim appeal arbitration arrangement as applied by some World Trade Organization’s (WTO) Member States while the Appellate Body cannot function. It provides guidance on the Member States to the interim appeal arbitration arrangements, the legal basis, its existence, who may rely on it, what it may be used for, how to use it as well as the procedure for the arbitration. Introduction The WTO Appellate Body consists of seven members and three of these members must serve on any appeal. Appellate Body Members are appointed for a maximum duration, see Practice Note: Introduction to World Trade Organization Appellate Body Dispute Settlement for guidance on the maximum term. As such there is a continuous requirement to fill vacancies left by persons who have left office. On 11 December 2019, the Appellate Body ceased to operate as the United States of America blocked the appointment of members of the Appellate Body. Members of the Appellate Body are appointed by consensus among all WTO Member States (see Practice Note:

A data-carrying mechanism which emulates some properties of a circuit-switched network over a packet-switched network. In practical terms, MPLS is a mechanism that allows the establishment of virtual paths (known as Label Switched Paths) for an unconnected mode protocol. The most famous protocol used with MPLS is IP (Internet Protocol), even though MPLS is a multi-protocol mechanism.

A device typically installed in a telephone exchange which connects customers’ telephone lines to the core network and is able to provide telephony, ISDN (integrated services digital network), and broadband such as DSL (digital subscriber line) all from a single platform.

This Agreement is made on [date] Parties 1 [Customer] a company incorporated in [England] with registered number [company number], whose registered office is at [address] (Customer); and 2 [Supplier] a company incorporated in [England] with registered number [company number], whose registered office is at [address] (Supplier) each of Customer and Supplier being a party and together Supplier and Customer are the parties. BACKGROUND (A) The Customer wishes to outsource the provision and management of its [describe function] services to the Supplier, in conjunction with the Customer’s appointment of a number of other service providers to provide related and/or interdependent services, and with whom the Supplier will be required to collaborate (along with any third party who the Customer may appoint to provide overall coordination and management of its multi-supplier ecosystem, on a service integration and management (SIAM) basis). (B) The Customer’s requirements are currently provided [internally OR by an associated company] [by insert name of existing supplier]. (C) The Supplier is experienced in the design, development and implementation of [describe function] services and has agreed to be responsible for the provision and management of the relevant

Multiple groups of users sharing a single instance of an application which is partitioned to logically isolate each group’s data.

A distribution company whose advisers are capable of advising on the products of a limited number of product providers.

These are financial advisers who are able to recommend products from a limited number of providers.

Overview Multi-tiered dispute resolution clauses (often described as escalation clauses, waterfall provisions, or ‘ADR-first’ mechanisms) are a defining feature of modern commercial contracts, particularly in the construction, infrastructure, and energy sectors. These clauses require parties to follow a sequence of agreed dispute resolution steps before commencing arbitration or litigation. Typical stages include: • referral to an engineer, contract administrator, or expert; • senior management negotiations; • mediation or conciliation; and/or • other structured pre-arbitral procedures. The use of these clauses offers advantages, but also present practical challenges. They may allow parties to a dispute on the threshold of arbitration a structured and safe period of time within which to attempt to resolve their disputes, potentially forestalling expensive arbitration proceedings. Failing complete resolution of the disputes, the use of such clauses may narrow the issues between the parties; informative of potential time and cost savings. The potential drawbacks include a delay in the commencement

The appropriate track for claims for which neither the small claims track nor the fast track is appropriate.

ARCHIVED: this archived Practice Note is not maintained and is for background information purposes only. Further, some of the links may not direct you to the provisions as at the date the guidance in this Practice Note was published. Note : this Practice Note only gives guidance on the provisions relating to the multi-track implemented on 1 April 2013. It does not provide guidance on any subsequent procedural amendments (whether to the CPR or any other procedural rules). Neither does it provide guidance on the implementation or interpretation of the April 2013 (or any subsequent) procedural updates. For guidance on the Jackson Reforms one-year on and on the April 2014 CPR updates, see Practice Notes: Jackson reforms on case management—one year on [Archived] and CPR changes—April 2014 [Archived] respectively. On 1 April 2013, the Jackson Reforms introduced, among other things, new provisions relating to case management for claims proceeding on the multi-track. The most important of these are considered below. For information on case management generally and on the multi-track specifically, see Case

This Practice Note provides guidance on the interpretation and application of the relevant provisions of the CPR. Depending on the court in which your matter is proceeding, you may also need to be mindful of additional provisions—see: Court specific guidance. In particular, note that CPR 26 (which covers, among other matters, allocation of claims to a case management track and the requirement to file a directions questionnaire), and significant parts of CPR 29/CPR PD 29 (which deal with case management in the multi-track), do not apply in the Commercial Court (see CPR 58.13 and CPR PD 58, para 10.1), Circuit Commercial Courts (see CPR 59.11 and CPR PD 59, para 7.1) and the Technology and Construction Court (see CPR 60.6 and CPR PD 60, para 10). For information on case management in the Commercial Court and Technology and Construction Court, see Practice Notes: • Commercial Court—Commercial Court—case management • Technology and Construction Court—TCC—case management This Practice Note considers all aspects of case management, on and after allocation of a case to the multi-track under CPR 29. Guidance