lex

Litasco v Banque El Amana. Open questions on the lex causae to find out a change in governing legislation (Article 3 Rome I), and for lois de police a full assimilation of Article 9 Rome I with Ralli Bros. – Model Slux

by
Litasco v Banque El Amana. Open questions on the lex causae to find out a change in governing legislation (Article 3 Rome I), and for lois de police a full assimilation of Article 9 Rome I with Ralli Bros. – Model Slux

In Litasco SA v Banque El Amana SA [2025] EWHC 312 (Comm) Hutton DJ engaged (on an software for abstract judgment) ia with a difficulty that one doesn’t see all too typically in litigation: a change in governing legislation beneath Article 3(2) Rome I; and with the applying of Article 9 Rome I’s overriding obligatory … Read more

Deutsche Financial institution v RusChemAlliance and Unicredit Financial institution v Ruschemalliance. The Court docket of Attraction confirming London because the go to court docket for arbitral anti-suit at the least in case of English regulation because the lex contractus (and the lengthy arm of UKSC Vedanta). – Model Slux

by
Deutsche Financial institution v RusChemAlliance and Unicredit Financial institution v Ruschemalliance. The Court docket of Attraction confirming London because the go to court docket for arbitral anti-suit at the least in case of English regulation because the lex contractus (and the lengthy arm of UKSC Vedanta). – Model Slux

Replace 13 March 2024 Paul MacMAhon studies the case goes to the UKSC. I’m mopping up the weblog queue so forgive me for posting late on Deutsche Financial institution v RusChemAlliance [2023] EWCA Civ 1144, a profitable attraction of SQD v QYP (Rev1) [2023] EWHC 2145 (Comm). (Common readers of the weblog know that I … Read more

x