The Resolution of Energy Disputes at Times of Dynamic Geopolitical Changes
Historically, U.S. supermajors and National Oil Companies dictated the rules, with many contracts from the early 20th Century adopting the laws of Texas, or domestic law such as in the famous ad-hoc arbitrations Petroleum Development Ltd. v. Sheikh of Abu Dhabi or Saudi Arabia v. Arabian American Oil Company.
Since the 80s – perhaps due to the perception, fueled by mega damages awards such as in Pennzoil Co. v. Texaco that the U.S. courts are unpredictable – the law of England and Wales started to be used more frequently and today represents the default choice for JOAs and PSAs at least in the Middle East and Asia. In disputes involving Soviet parties, Stockholm and Swedish law became commonplace along with Switzerland due to the perception of political neutrality. As we know, this is no longer the case.
Today, the laws of the DIFC, together with a reinvigorated DIAC and the now well established DIFC Courts, represent an attractive proposition as a third-country neutral forum for dispute resolution and legal seat for international arbitration proceedings.
Sheila Shadmand, Speaker, Jones Day, UAE
Andrew Spink KC, Speaker, Outer Temple Chambers, UK
Natasja Pollemans, Speaker, Horizons & Co. Law Firm, UAE
Rodrigo Carè, Moderator, Horizons & Co. Law Firm, UAE
Andreas Schregenberger, Speaker, Gabriel Arbitration, Switzerland
BLACK FRIDAY SALE
Now through December 1, save 30% off all NYSBA Publications, downloadable forms, and our Automated Power of Attorney, when you use the code PUB9435 at checkout.
Note: Does not apply to Practical Skills Series titles.
- November 15, 2023
- Online On-Demand