International Arbitration

Our dedicated international arbitration lawyers [and attorneys] have extensive experience of working with a broad spectrum of clients in high value arbitration disputes. We act in arbitrations administered by all the major institutions (including ICC, LCIA, SIAC, HKIAC, DIAC and UNCITRAL) as well as ad hoc arbitrations.
 

We provide advice and support at all stages of the arbitration process including:

• drafting arbitration agreements;
• advising on choice of law, jurisdiction and arbitration rules;
• advising on enforceability of arbitration clauses;
• providing pre-dispute strategic input;
• Acting as advocates on arbitral hearings; and
• advising on enforcement of arbitration awards and other post-award matters.

We also advise on related court matters such as jurisdiction challenges, freezing injunctions, anti-suit injunctions and other interim and urgent measures.

Our practice head, James Glaysher, also sits as an arbitrator, having received institutional appointments to act as sole arbitrator, tribunal chair and co-arbitrator. He draws on this experience of the other side of the hearing room when representing our clients’ interests.

Our international arbitration team and dispute resolution specialists are supported by lawyers in our corporate, commercial, criminal litigation, employment, immigration and real estate teams, to provide clients with a truly multi-disciplinary service.

Why International Arbitration?
 

In today’s interconnected global economy, international arbitration fulfils a crucial role.

It provides commercial entities with a confidential dispute forum and judgments (awards) that can be enforced across the globe by virtue of the New York Convention -  an international treaty with over 165 signatories which obliges national courts to enforce awards from other signatory countries without substantial interference.

Why is international arbitration increasingly popular in cross-border disputes?
 

Global businesses across a wide range of industries often favour international arbitration because of the ability to select:

• arbitrator(s) with particular sectoral and / or geographical knowledge;
• a seat of arbitration that is geographically neutral to the disputing parties; and
• a procedural framework tailored to a dispute.

International Arbitration FAQs

What is international arbitration?

Arbitration is a private procedure by which parties to a commercial dispute agree to have a neutral third party (typically one or three arbitrators) hear their case and make a binding decision.  It is an alternative to court litigation in which the parties agree to use an arbitrator or arbitration tribunal instead of national courts.

 

Why international arbitration?

The expansion of global trade and cross-border investment has led to increasingly complex commercial relationships, and when disputes inevitably arise, international arbitration is often the preferred method of resolution. It offers several key advantages, including the enforceability of arbitral awards under the 1958 New York Convention—ratified by 172 states—which provides a level of global recognition unmatched by court judgments.

Arbitration also offers neutrality, an essential feature when parties are from different jurisdictions, as it avoids perceived or actual bias in domestic courts. Its procedural flexibility allows parties to tailor the process to their specific needs, while the ability to appoint arbitrators with relevant expertise ensures decisions are informed and contextually grounded.

Privacy is another benefit, as proceedings are typically confidential. Historically rooted and widely embraced in sectors such as construction, shipping, and insurance, arbitration has evolved into the primary mechanism for resolving complex international disputes. That said, it is not without drawbacks: arbitrators have more limited coercive powers than courts, and summary dismissal of unmeritorious claims is less common—though this is improving.

Ultimately, careful drafting of arbitration clauses at the outset is crucial, as tribunals derive their jurisdiction from party agreement, not inherent authority. Arbitration, while not suitable for every scenario, continues to gain global prominence due to its adaptability, neutrality, and enforceability.

 

When is an arbitration clause enforceable?

Courts generally uphold arbitration clauses as a valid method of dispute resolution. For an arbitration agreement to be enforceable, it usually must be in writing, though it does not always require signatures from all parties. Additionally, under the separability principle, the arbitration agreement remains valid and enforceable independently, even if the main contract is void or voidable, unless otherwise agreed by the parties. Arbitration agreements can be entered into separately, after the main underlying contract has been executed (albeit typically they will be incorporated within the underlying agreement).

 

To what extent is arbitration cheaper than Court litigation?

Concerns regarding costs is rightly often at the forefront of parties’ minds when commencing or defending a claim.

Arbitration proceedings usually involves higher upfront costs than court litigation due to having to pay the tribunal’s costs (i.e. the costs of the arbitrator(s)) as a prerequisite for commencing the claim, and these costs can be significant (in comparison, the maximum fee for issuing a claim in the High Court is £10,000 whereas the costs of arbitrator(s) can easily exceed this).

That being said, arbitration proceedings can be cheaper than litigation due to its procedural flexibility, allowing directions to be tailored to the requirements of the dispute and the preferences of the parties. It is usually faster to list hearings in arbitration compared to the litigation where the courts are inundated and experience delays. The onerous disclosure exercise in court proceedings may be slimmed down in arbitration so that fewer documents are needed to be disclosed which can save significant time and costs.

Legal costs are generally recoverable in arbitration proceedings, which is the same as in English litigation, however compared to other non-UK jurisdictions where legal costs are not recoverable or recoverable to the same degree as in England & Wales, the recoverability of legal costs in arbitration is a tangible benefit that makes arbitration more cost-effective than court proceedings.

 

To what extent can an arbitration award be appealed?

Parties to arbitration proceedings are permitted to appeal an arbitral award in very limited circumstances.

Pursuant to section 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996 (the “Act”), a party to an arbitration seated in England may appeal to the English Court “on a question of law arising out of an award made in the proceedings”. An appeal can only be brought with the English Court’s permission, or the agreement of all the other arbitral parties. However, note that typically parties will exclude the right to appeal specifically on this ground (whether expressly in their arbitration agreement or by adopting arbitral rules that waive the right to any form of appeal).

The English Court will only grant permission to appeal on this ground if it is satisfied in respect of the following:

1. The determination of the question of law will “substantially affect” the rights of one or more of the arbitral parties;
    
2. The question of law is one which the arbitral tribunal was asked to determine;
    
3. On the basis of the findings of fact in the arbitral award, (i) the decision of the arbitral tribunal on the question of law is “obviously wrong”, or (ii) the question of law is one of “general public importance” and the decision of the arbitral tribunal is at least “open to serious doubt”; and
    
4. Despite the agreement of the parties to resolve the matter by arbitration, it is “just and proper in all the circumstances” for the Court to determine the question of law.

Parties are also permitted, again on limited grounds, to apply to the English Court to challenge an arbitral award:

Section 67 of the Act provides a ground for challenge on the basis that the arbitral tribunal lacked “substantive jurisdiction”.

Section 68 of the Act provides for a challenge on the basis of “serious irregularity” affecting the arbitral tribunal, the arbitration proceedings, or the award.

Parties wishing to appeal or challenge an arbitral award must typically do so within 28 days of the date of the award (in accordance with section 70(3) of the Act). Accordingly, legal advice should be obtained as soon as possible following receipt of the award. Please do not hesitate to contact a member of our International Arbitration team.

 

 

Our International Arbitration law experience

The group has extensive experience of both ad hoc arbitrations and cases administered by all of the major institutions (ICC, LCIA, SIAC, HKIAC, DIAC and UNCITRAL).

Examples of international arbitration matters that we have advised on include :

• Acting for the Respondents in a suite of ad hoc arbitrations comprising claims of c. US$ 150 million arising from the sale and purchase of crude oil.

• Representing a private equity owned South American independent oil and gas company in an ICC arbitration concerning a post-acquisition dispute worth US$ 500 million.

• Acting for a UAE-based mechanical and electrical subcontractor in an AED 200 million dispute against the main contractor following termination. The project related to a mixed-use development in Dubai.

• Representing Cypriot and BVI-incorporated Respondents to an HKIAC arbitration concerning the sale and purchase of shares in a media and entertainment company.

• Acting for a large national oil company in an UNCITRAL arbitration, defending claims of over US$ 150 million relating to the sale and marketing of base oil.

• Acting for a Norwegian oil and gas company in one of the first applications to utilise the ICC’s emergency arbitrator provisions, in respect of a disputing arising out of a post-closing price adjustment mechanism.

• Representing a West African commodities trading company in an LCIA arbitration defending claims of US$ 80 million brought by a multinational energy and commodities company.

• Acting for an African lubricants supplier in LCIA arbitration claims brought against an international commodities supplier.

• Acting for an English FCA-regulated e-money institution in ad hoc arbitration proceedings against a West African services provider.

• Representing a US company which was co-claimant with a US manufacturer, against a multinational mining group and ten of its subsidiaries