Overview

This month’s review by Allen & Overy covers Hamblen J’s dismissal of Pisa’s challenge to the jurisdiction of the English court (the choice of court specified in two Swaps). With echoes of the recent BVG v JP Morgan Chase Bank case (May Litigation Review) Pisa had argued that its (sole) defence concerned its capacity and authority to enter into the Swaps and that, as these matters fell within Article 22(2) of the Brussels Regulation, the entire dispute should be transferred back to Italy to be determined there.

On the arbitration front, it reports on the decision of Burton J in AES Ust-Kamenogorsk Hydropower Plant LLP v Ust-Kamenogorsk Hydropower Plant JSC who granted an anti suit injunction in support of an arbitration clause in circumstances where the applicant did not intend to commence an arbitration but simply wished to restrain its counterparty from pursing a foreign action in breach of the arbitration clause.
It also features the decision of Jones v Environcom Ltd & ors, in which the court gave helpful guidance regarding a broker’s duty to advise an insured on the duty of disclosure owed to an insurer. Importantly, Mr Justice David Steel held that it is not enough for a broker to rely on written standard form explanations.

To read the full review click on ‘View Briefing’.