Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In 2011, the government of Mauritius challenged Sir Christopher Greenwood's role in the arbitration proceedings on the grounds that his role as a UK Foreign and Commonwealth legal adviser could bias him in favour of the United Kingdom's claims to the Chagos Islands. However, this was rejected by the tribunal on the basis that this "neither ...
This is a chronological list of World Trade Organization dispute settlement cases. As of December 2024, there have been 631 such cases. [1] List. This list ...
Pages in category "Arbitration cases" The following 36 pages are in this category, out of 36 total. ... Transfield Shipping Inc v Mercator Shipping Inc; Treaty of ...
Insurance law, arbitration: Where an arbitration agreement does not specify a governing law then the law of the underlying main contract will ordinarily govern the arbitration agreement. Where the main contract does not specify a governing law then it is for the courts to determine the law with which the arbitration agreement is most closely ...
The arbitrators of the case, by a majority, decided in favour of Mercator. They held that the loss from getting a lower price on the next chartering contract was within the first rule in Hadley v Baxendale [3] as arising "naturally, i.e. according to the usual course of things, from such breach of contract itself".
The main body of law applicable to arbitration is normally contained either in the national Private International Law Act (as is the case in Switzerland) or in a separate law on arbitration (as is the case in England, Republic of Korea and Jordan [24]). In addition to this, a number of national procedural laws may also contain provisions ...
Greece v United Kingdom [1952] ICJ 1 (also called the Ambatielos Case) is a public international law case, concerning state responsibility for economic damage. The International Court of Justice held that the UK had to enter into arbitration under the terms of a treaty it had made with Greece, although the ICJ itself held it had no jurisdiction to hear and decide upon the substantive dispute ...
The Arbitration Act 1996 had a similar effect as adjudication. Such was the effect on the number of cases being brought before the TCC, extra capacity meant that TCC judges could act as judge-arbitrators, utilising their experience and knowledge while contributing to the CPR's goals in reducing litigation costs. [15]