Arbitration Law Monthly

In AZ v BY [2024] EWHC 1847 (Comm) HHJ Pelling KC addressed, in a somewhat unusual context, two important questions affecting final awards: how significant is the dispositive; and can the parties agree to revive the tribunal's jurisdiction after a final award has been given and the tribunal has become functus officio?

In RSM Production Corporation v Gaz du Cameroun SA [2023] EWHC 2820 (Comm); [2024] 1 Lloyd's Rep 133 there was a fairly straightforward application for an anti-suit injunction. The defendant raised a series of defences, including that the arbitration clause did not extend to the dispute and that the foreign proceedings were purely for interim relief in support of arbitration and were not substantive. Butcher J dismissed each of the defences put forward.

The English courts will readily grant anti-suit relief to restrain a party to an arbitration clause specifying England as the seat from commencing or pursuing proceedings in the courts of another jurisdiction. A question which has been left unanswered since the passing of the Arbitration Act 1996 is whether the English courts will intervene where the seat of the arbitration is outside England. The matter has now been considered in two first instance cases, one of which has been appealed to the Court of Appeal.