On 28 May 2026, the Arbitrazh Court of the Kaliningrad Region refused to recognise and enforce two LCIA awards rendered against RTI Limited (“RTI”) and International Company Public Joint Stock Company United Company RUSAL (“RUSAL”) in favour of OWH SE i.L. (“OWH”). The court rejected OWH’s procedural objections, holding that RUSAL, although a debtor under […]
News
Nina Jankovic Named Lexology Construction Future Leader
Aceris Law is pleased to announce that Nina Jankovic, Counsel at Aceris Law, has been ranked as a Future Leader in Lexology Index: Construction, recognising her work in international construction arbitration and complex cross-border construction disputes. This recognition is meaningful because Lexology Index research draws on detailed market feedback from clients, corporate counsel and leading […]
Blasket v. Spain: Limits on Sovereign Asset Discovery
On 12 June 2026, Judge Beryl A. Howell of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia issued a post-judgment discovery order in Blasket Renewable Investments, LLC v. Kingdom of Spain, a long-running enforcement proceeding arising from an ICSID award against Spain. The decision matters because it confirms both the breadth and the […]
Can Claimants Avoid Arbitration by Adding Non-Signatory Defendants?
Arbitration clauses are not always challenged directly. Often, the challenge is more subtle: a claimant brings court proceedings against both the contractual counterparty and an additional defendant who never signed the arbitration agreement, i.e., a non-signatory or third party. The question then becomes whether that party structure is enough to keep the dispute in court. […]
Singapore SICC Rejects Attempt to Set Aside Costs Award Denying Third-Party Funding Costs
In DTH v DTF [2026] SGHC(I) 5, the Singapore International Commercial Court (“SICC”) dismissed an application by successful arbitral claimants to set aside or remit the costs portion of a Singapore-seated arbitral award. The applicants had won the merits phase of the arbitration but failed before the arbitral majority to recover their third-party funding costs […]
FLOPEC v. Sudhaus: New York Convention Arbitration Prevails
In FLOPEC v. Sudhaus, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania gave a clear reminder that an agreed arbitral forum is not easily displaced. The Court ordered arbitration under the New York Convention in a high-value Ecuadorian oil shipping dispute involving Flota Petrolera Ecuatoriana EP, a state-owned company, even though FLOPEC […]
Krimpets, Commerce, and Arbitration: The Supreme Court’s Latest FAA § 1 Decision
On 28 May 2026, the United States Supreme Court issued its unanimous decision in Flowers Foods, Inc. v. Brock, further clarifying the scope of the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) § 1 exemption for transportation workers. The FAA requires courts to enforce private arbitration agreements. However, § 1 of the FAA provides an important exception for […]
Rwanda v. UK: PCA Tribunal Rejects Claims Over the Asylum Partnership Agreement
The PCA’s award in Rwanda v. United Kingdom turns a politically charged migration dispute into a careful lesson in treaty interpretation, diplomatic correspondence and the legal consequences of saying “acceptable” in a note verbale. Although the case arose from the Rwanda-UK Asylum Partnership Agreement (the “Asylum Partnership Agreement”), its importance extends beyond asylum policy. The […]
Indonesia’s New Commodity Export Regime: Resource Nationalism and International Arbitration
On 20 May 2026, Indonesia issued Government Regulation No. 24/2026 (PP No. 24/2026) (unofficial English translation here) on the Governance of Exports of Strategic Natural Resource Commodities (“Regulation”), which entered into force on 1 June 2026.[1] Under the Regulation, Strategic Natural Resource Commodities may only be exported by a State-owned enterprise (“SOE”) appointed by the […]
