The practice of including an arbitration provision in all types of contracts has become quite common. Including such a provision in a contract should, however, always be a considered choice, based on sound advice, to avoid any misunderstandings about the breadth, scope and consequences of including such a provision. Yesterday, Pillsbury attorney Ray Sweigart published his client advisory titled About that English Law and Arbitration Clause: Consider enforcement implications before signing. In the Advisory, he discusses the practice, in international commercial contracts, parties with no operations or other relationship to England or the United Kingdom specifying English law as controlling, with a clause providing for arbitration of disputes in London. In Cruz City v Unitech & Ors, [2014] EWHC 3131 (Comm), the English High Court was faced with a dispute over enforcement of an arbitral award between a Mauritian claimant and an Indian defendant. Noting the English law policy that judgments of the English court and English arbitration awards should be complied with, and under the principles set out in Masri v Consolidated Contractors International (UK) Ltd (No 2), [2008] EWCA Civ 303, the court held that it was appropriate to enforce an arbitral award by the appointment of receivers over the foreign defendant’s assets.
If you have any questions about the content of this blog, please contact the Pillsbury attorney with whom you regularly work or Ray Sweigart, the author of this blog.