Are anti-suit injunctions by the english courts ‘suited’ to protect foreign seated arbitrations? Observations on recent judgments involving sanctioned russian entities and suggested alternatives
Are anti-suit injunctions by the english courts ‘suited’ to protect foreign seated arbitrations? Observations on recent judgments involving sanctioned russian entities and suggested alternatives

Summary/Abstract: The operation of sanctions against the Russian Federation since Ukraine’s invasion seems to have opened a way out of arbitration agreements for Russian entities. As a result, instead of arbitrating their disputes, several Russian entities have approached their national courts. Conversely, the counterparties to such arbitration agreements have started approaching courts across jurisdictions to seek anti-suit injunctions in support of their arbitration agreements. The present publication analyses the approach recently taken by the courts of the United Kingdom when dealing with requests for anti-suit injunctions. In particular, the publication maps out the grounds considered by the said courts in granting or refusing the relief sought. This paper then touches upon potential arguments that may come up for consideration in light of how such similar requests have been treated in Singapore and Hong Kong, in particular. The authors further analyse alternative remedies that parties to such arbitration agreements may pursue to hold recalcitrant parties to their bargains i.e., the arbitration agreements. They suggest that anti-suit injunctions may not be the most effective remedy in given circumstances or, in themselves. On that basis, they suggest ways to combine it with Mareva injunctions, or with proceedings for damages to hold the Russian entities to their obligation under the arbitration agreement.

• Details
• Contents