Morrison Foerster is an international law firm with lawyers practicing throughout the United States, Asia, and Europe. Click to discover more.

mofo_share_image.jpg

Morrison Foerster

favicon.ico

favicon-16x16.png

favicon-32x32.png

apple-touch-icon.png

MoFo Favicons

Terms / Notices

Cookies

Privacy Policy

Attorney Advertising

Secure Login

Alumni

  Facebook

MoFo Facebook

  Linkedin

MoFo LinkedIN

Twitter

MoFo Twitter

YouTube

MoFo Youtube

Morrison Foerster - Footer

You have not solved the recaptcha challenge yet or session expired, try again.

Disclaimer

Unsolicited e-mails and information sent to Morrison Foerster will not be considered confidential, may be disclosed to others pursuant to our <a href="https://www.mofo.com/about/privacy-policy.html">Privacy Policy</a>, may not receive a response, and do not create an attorney-client relationship with Morrison Foerster. If you are not already a client of Morrison Foerster, do not include any confidential information in this message. Also, please note that our attorneys do not seek to practice law in any jurisdiction in which they are not properly authorized to do so.

Feedback

mofo-logo-2022.svg

People

Capabilities

Resources

About

Culture

Offices

Careers

Stay Connected

Chiraag Shah and Ioanna Lamprinaki authored an article for Thomson Reuters’ Practical Law Arbitration Blog that covers the English Court of Appeal’s recent decision in Enka v Chubb, which affirmed the English courts’ jurisdiction to determine anti-suit

Enka v Chubb: English Court of Appeal Reinforces London’s Position as Arbitration Venue of Choice

About Morrison Forester

people-default-header-desktop.jpg

people-default-header-mobile.jpg

Default Meta Data

Chiraag Shah and Ioanna Lamprinaki authored an article for Thomson Reuters’ Practical Law Arbitration Blog that covers the English Court of Appeal’s recent decision in <a target="_blank" href="https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/w-025-3703">Enka v Chubb</a>, which affirmed the English courts’ jurisdiction to determine anti-suit injunctions in support of arbitrations seated in London, even when the courts would need to apply foreign law to decide the issue. The decision also clarified that, absent an explicit choice of law, it should be strongly presumed that an arbitration agreement is governed by the law of the chosen arbitration seat, and not by the law governing the main contract.The authors note that “this is an important decision which reinforces London’s position as an arbitration venue of choice.” Further, they point to the judgment being “a useful reminder of the importance of including an express choice of law provision in an arbitration clause” and a reminder of the “importance of clear drafting, especially where the place of performance/governing law of the main agreement may not match the chosen seat in the arbitration agreement.”Read the<a target="_blank" href="http://arbitrationblog.practicallaw.com/enka-v-chubb-english-court-of-appeal-reinforces-londons-position-as-arbitration-venue-of-choice/"> full article</a>.

Enka v Chubb: English Court of Appeal Reinforces London’s Position as Arbitration Venue of Choice