Chinese Arbitration Award Caught in Arbitration Institute Dispute
|
|
- Rosalyn Hall
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Latham & Watkins International Arbitration Practice Number 1565 July 24, 2013 Chinese Arbitration Award Caught in Arbitration Institute Dispute A Chinese court s refusal to enforce an arbitration award from the CIETAC Shanghai Sub-Commission may affect other disputes. The breakdown in the relationship between the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC) and its former sub-commissions in Shanghai and Shenzhen has attracted considerable attention since The turf war between the most pre-eminent arbitral commission in Mainland China and two of its established sub-commissions appeared to be resolved in April 2013, when the Shanghai Sub-Commission publicly announced its name change and introduced a set of new arbitration rules and panel of arbitrators. The dust, however, is not yet settled. In May 2013, a court in Suzhou, China refused to enforce an award made by a CIETAC Shanghai Sub- Commission tribunal in December 2012 because the tribunal failed to inform the parties of the change in the Shanghai Sub-Commission s status. The decision, which adds uncertainty to the enforceability of awards rendered in cases administered by the former sub-commissions of CIETAC before their independence, has caused a ripple in arbitration circles both in China and abroad. This Client Alert analyses the grounds on which the Suzhou Court refused to enforce the award and its potential effect on the enforcement future of arbitral awards in China. Background On 7 May 2013, the Intermediate People s Court of Suzhou City, Jiangsu Province of the People s Republic of China (the Suzhou Court), by a Civil Order (2013) Su Zhong Shang Zhong Shen Zi No (the Civil Order), decided not to enforce an award rendered in December 2012 in an arbitration administered by the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC) Shanghai Sub-Commission (CIETAC Shanghai), which has now changed its name to the Shanghai International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission, concurrently known as Shanghai International Arbitration Centre (or SHIAC). The parties to the enforcement proceeding before the Suzhou Court are marquee names in the Chinese and global solar panel market. The applicant, Jiangxi LDK Solar Hi-Tech (LDK Solar), established in 2005 in China, is the world's largest producer of solar wafers and a leading high-purity polysilicon and solar module manufacturer. In June, 2007, LDK Solar was listed on the New York Stock Exchange. Latham & Watkins operates worldwide as a limited liability partnership organized under the laws of the State of Delaware (USA) with affiliated limited liability partnerships conducting the practice in the United Kingdom, France, Italy and Singapore and as affiliated partnerships conducting the practice in Hong Kong and Japan. The Law Office of Salman M. Al-Sudairi is Latham & Watkins associated office in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. In Qatar, Latham & Watkins LLP is licensed by the Qatar Financial Centre Authority. Under New York s Code of Professional Responsibility, portions of this communication contain attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Results depend upon a variety of factors unique to each representation. Please direct all inquiries regarding our conduct under New York s Disciplinary Rules to Latham & Watkins LLP, 885 Third Avenue, New York, NY , Phone: Copyright 2013 Latham & Watkins. All Rights Reserved.
2 The respondent against which the enforcement was sought, Suzhou Artes Sunshine Power Technology (Artes) is a mainland subsidiary of Nasdaq-listed Canadian Solar, one of the world s largest makers of solar panels. In October 2007, LDK Solar and Artes entered into an agreement for the supply of solar wafers under which the parties agreed to refer their disputes to CIETAC (Shanghai Sub-Commission) for arbitration (the 2007 Agreement). In June 2008, the same parties signed two additional supply contracts which were to last for ten years (the 2008 Agreements). The arbitration clauses in the 2008 Agreements are, though similar, slightly different from the 2007 Agreement, which provided for arbitration at CIETAC (with the place of arbitration in Shanghai). Disputes later arose between the parties relating to the entitlement to a RMB 60,000,000 deposit and termination of the 2008 Agreements, which led LDK Solar to file a notice of arbitration before the SHIAC (then known as CIETAC Shanghai) in July After a two-year proceeding, the SHIAC Tribunal, by an award dated 7 December 2012 ((2012) CIETAC Shanghai No. 452) (the SHIAC Award), found in favor of LDK Solar. Of particular importance in this case is the interplay between the arbitration proceedings before the SHIAC Tribunal and the stalemate between CIETAC and its Sub-Commissions in terms of the time line. By way of illustration, below is a chart setting out these parallel chains of events. Date SHIAC Arbitration Proceeding Breakdown between CIETAC and SHIAC 23 July 2010 LDK Solar commenced arbitration against Artes before the SHIAC (then still known as CIETAC Shanghai). 28 July 2010 CIETAC Shanghai by letter notified the parties of its acceptance of the case. 6 December 2011 CIETAC Shanghai was stated in the Civil Order to have applied for registration with the Municipal Bureau of Justice of Shanghai (Shanghai BOJ). 8 December 2011 CIETAC Shanghai was stated in the Civil Order to have obtained the Certificate of Registration for Arbitral Commission from the Shanghai BOJ. February 2012 Dispute started to brew between CIETAC and its Shanghai and South China Sub-Commissions when CIETAC announced the implementation of new arbitration rules in May Under the new rules, notices of arbitration (even for arbitration agreements with express reference to CIETAC Shanghai or South China Sub- Commission) are required to be filed with CIETAC (in Beijing). This change of the filing Latham & Watkins Client Alert No July 24, 2013 Page 2
3 procedures gave rise to strong opposition from the Shanghai and South China Sub- Commissions, which eventually led to their independence from CIETAC. 1 August 2012 By a public announcement, CIETAC, with immediate effect, 1. Suspended the Shanghai and South China Sub-Commissions authority to accept and manage cases in which Shanghai or Shenzhen was agreed to be the place for CIETAC arbitrations 2. Requested that parties to the arbitration agreements described above submit their notices of arbitration to CIETAC (in Beijing) 11 October 2012 By a reply to the Council for the Promotion of International Trade, Shanghai, the Shanghai BOJ acknowledged SHIAC s independent authority to accept and administer arbitration cases. In particular, the Shanghai BOJ pointed out that SHIAC s such authority originated from parties agreement, not from CIETAC s authorization. 7 December 2012 The SHIAC Tribunal issued the SHIAC Award. In the SHIAC Award, Jiangxi LDK was awarded with damages of RMB 60,000,000 yuan. 31 December 2012 By a public announcement, CIETAC reinstated the illegality of the declaration of independence of its Shanghai and South China Sub-Commissions, and it 1. Prohibited the two sub-commissions from continuing using the name, brand and logo of CIETAC 2. Terminated their authority to accept and administer arbitration cases 3. Clarified that cases accepted and administered by the CIETAC Shanghai and South China Sub-Commissions before 1 August 2012 may be concluded in accordance with the CIETAC Arbitration Rules and under the uniform leadership of CIETAC in respect of case administration as provided in the rules Latham & Watkins Client Alert No July 24, 2013 Page 3
4 21 January 2013 By a joint announcement of CIETAC Shanghai and Shen Court of International Arbitration (SCIA) (which had then changed its name from CIETAC South China Sub-Commission to SCIA) reinstated the legality of their establishment and authority to perform functions relating to arbitrations. February 2013 LDK Solar applied to the Suzhou Court for enforcement of the SHIAC Award. 16 April 2013 CIETAC Shanghai publicly announced: 7 May 2013 The Suzhou Court issued the Civil Order in which it rejected the enforcement of the SHIAC Award. 1. Its name change to SHIAC 2. Its willingness to accept cases filed in accordance with arbitration agreements which provide for arbitration at CIETAC Shanghai Commission / Branch / Sub- Commission 3. The introduction of new arbitration rules and panel of arbitrators, both to be effective from 1 May Grounds for Refusing Enforcement In the enforcement proceedings before the Suzhou Court, Artes raised three arguments to resist enforcement: The lack of jurisdiction of SHIAC to hear the dispute Procedural irregularity Errors made by the SHIAC Tribunal in findings of law and the application of law As shown in the Civil Order, the Suzhou Court appears to have only considered the first argument. In deciding whether the SHIAC Tribunal had jurisdiction over the case in question, the Suzhou Court considered three factors as relevant: The parties agreement regarding the arbitral commission The relationship between SHIAC and CIETAC before SHIAC obtained the Certificate of Registration in December 2011 Latham & Watkins Client Alert No July 24, 2013 Page 4
5 The relationship between SHIAC and CIETAC after SHIAC obtained the Certificate of Registration in December 2011 When considering the first factor, the Suzhou Court noted that the disputed matters fell within the jurisdiction of the 2008 Agreements, and therefore, the arbitration clauses in the 2008 Agreements should govern. The parties agreement under the 2008 Agreement, as interpreted by the Suzhou Court, was to select CIETAC as the arbitral commission, with Shanghai as the place of arbitration. In other words, according to the Suzhou Court, the parties did not intend to refer disputes to CIETAC Shanghai for arbitration. As regards the relationship between SHIAC and CIETAC at the material time, the Suzhou Court acknowledged that SHIAC had become an independent arbitral institution as of 8 December 2011 when it was successfully registered with the Shanghai BOJ. Prior to that time, SHIAC was an integral part of the CIETAC. The Suzhou Court found that an arbitral commission s jurisdiction to administer arbitration cases originates from the parties agreement. Thus, the parties choice of CIETAC did not cause any problem before December 2011 when SHIAC was still considered an integral part of CIETAC. However, when SHIAC ceased to be part of CIETAC in December 2011, SHIAC was obligated to explain to the parties the change in the nature of the arbitral arbitration and to offer the parties an opportunity to select a different arbitral institution. By failing to do so, the SHIAC Tribunal acted against the parties true intention, and therefore, the Tribunal no longer had jurisdiction to hear the disputes after December Enforceability of Awards Made by Former Sub-Commissions of CIETAC The reasoning provided by the Suzhou Court in the Civil Order raises a number of questions. First, the Suzhou Court referred to paragraph 2(2) of Article 237 of the Civil Procedural Law of the PRC as the legislative basis for non-enforcement, but that provision was intended to address the situations when the matters adjudicated by the tribunal are not arbitrable under the Arbitration Law of the PRC (for example, administrative disputes) or when matters fall outside the scope of arbitration agreement. The current case does not appear to fit in either of the categories. Second, a the Suzhou Court drew a line in December 2011 when the SHIAC obtained its registration certificate, and consequently lost its jurisdiction to hear disputes referred to for CIETAC arbitrations. Registration, or the question regarding SHIAC s authority to accept CIETAC cases, however, was not made public until August 2012 when CIETAC announced its suspension of SHIAC s authority in this regard. Before the Civil Order was delivered, few parties were concerned about SHIAC s authority to administer CIETAC cases filed before August The Suzhou Court s decision in the Civil Order has widened the uncertainty period by casting doubt on the legality of SHIAC s authority to administer CIETAC cases between December 2011 and August Ironically, the generally accepted principle of party autonomy served as the fundamental basis of the Suzhou Court s decision. The Suzhou Court based its refusal of enforcement on its interpretation of the arbitration clauses in the underlying agreements that the parties intended to select CIETAC (not any other arbitral institution) as the arbitration commission. Whether or not the Suzhou Court would have made the same decision if, for example, the arbitration clause had expressly referred to CIETAC Shanghai as the arbitral commission, remains unclear. Latham & Watkins Client Alert No July 24, 2013 Page 5
6 Conclusion Notwithstanding the above, the effect of the Civil Order should not be over stated. First, only cases accepted or administered by the relevant former sub-commissions in a limited period of time from August 2012 and (probably) May 2013 are potentially in the crosshairs. Further, the decision of the Suzhou Court is not a precedent which must be followed by other courts in China, and the decision should not be treated as a universal view held by the Chinese judiciary regarding the enforceability of awards made by SHIAC and SCIA tribunals. Clearly, at least in Shanghai and Shenzhen where SHIAC and SCIA are based, the courts will uphold their authority to administer CIETAC cases during the transition period, and the courts will likely adopt a more supportive approach when dealing with enforcement applications of awards delivered during such period. In other parts of China, the situation may be less clear, and the enforcement prospect could well depend on various other factors, such as the location of the party against which enforcement is sought (bearing in mind that the respondent in this case is a local Suzhou entity), the assets available for enforcement, the local court s professionalism and familiarity with arbitration practice, among other issues. On a separate note, SHIAC and SCIA have now become independent arbitral commissions, and it will be interesting to see if their awards will be enforceable in jurisdictions outside the PRC, in particular, Hong Kong. The Hong Kong Arbitration Ordinance provides that only awards made by certain recognized arbitral commissions in Mainland China will be enforceable in Hong Kong. To date, neither SHIAC nor SCIA appears to have been gazetted to be qualified as one of such recognized arbitral commissions for enforcement purposes. Hong Kong will need to address the current legislative obstacles to enforcing awards administered by these two arbitral commissions. If you have questions about this Client Alert, please contact one of the authors listed below or the Latham lawyer with whom you normally consult: Yang Ing Loong ( 杨炎龙 ) Ingloong.Yang@lw.com Hong Kong Tina Wang( 王骁 ) tina.wang@lw.com Hong Kong Client Alert is published by Latham & Watkins as a news reporting service to clients and other friends. The information contained in this publication should not be construed as legal advice. Should further analysis or explanation of the subject matter be required, please contact the lawyer with whom you normally consult. A complete list of Latham s Client Alerts can be found at If you wish to update your contact details or customize the information you receive from Latham & Watkins, visit to subscribe to the firm s global client mailings program. Latham & Watkins Client Alert No July 24, 2013 Page 6
Client Alert. UK Takeovers: Defined Benefit Pension Trustees Gain New Rights. The Introduction of Rules in Favour of Pension Trustees
Number 1511 30 April 2013 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Corporate and Tax Department UK Takeovers: Defined Benefit Pension Trustees Gain New Rights. A framework within which the takeover parties and the
More informationArbitration in the PRC A Real Alternative or Not?
Arbitration in the PRC A Real Alternative or Not? (Thomas Weimann, Düsseldorf) July 2 nd, 2013 5 Contents 1. Main Characteristics of Arbitration Legislation in the PRC 2. Main Arbitration Institutions
More informationClient Alert. Hong Kong Jurisdiction Relating to Cross Border Insolvency Issues Becomes Increasingly Clear. Background
Number 1502 22 April 2013 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Litigation Department Jurisdiction Relating to Cross Border Insolvency Issues Becomes Increasingly Clear The fact that the controlling mind of a
More informationESMA Publishes Draft Regulatory Technical Standards on Cross-border Application of EMIR
Latham & Watkins Derivatives Practice Number 1568 July 25, 2013 ESMA Publishes Draft Regulatory Technical Standards on Cross-border Application of Parties engaged in derivative contracts should review
More informationCompetition Between Arbitral Institutions in China Fighting for a Better System?
Competition Between Arbitral Institutions in China Fighting for a Better System? Kluwer Arbitration Blog October 16, 2015 Jie Zheng (Ghent University) Please refer to this post as: Jie Zheng, Competition
More informationClient Alert. SEC Staff Provides New Guidance Regarding the Rule 15a-6 Registration Exemption for Foreign Broker-Dealers.
Number 1495 April 8, 2013 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Corporate Department SEC Staff Provides New Guidance Regarding the Rule 15a-6 Registration Exemption for Foreign Broker-Dealers The FAQs provide
More informationClient Alert. In its Denial of a Power Plant Sale, FERC Sheds Light on the Meaning of Control and the Importance of Mitigation.
Number 1492 March 26, 2013 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Finance Department In its Denial of a Power Plant Sale, FERC Sheds Light on the Meaning of Control and the Importance of Mitigation The decision
More informationClient Alert. IRS Releases Final FATCA Regulations. Summary. Background
Number 1460 January 29, 2013 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Tax Department IRS Releases Final FATCA Regulations Summary The Regulations represent a significant step towards FATCA implementation, yet considerable
More informationThe Final Municipal Advisor Rule: Navigating the Minefield
Latham & Watkins Financial Institutions Regulatory Practice Number 1614 November 22, 2013 The Final Municipal Advisor Rule: Navigating the Minefield While the final rule narrows the scope and reach of
More informationItaly Implements Directive Requiring Non-Financial Disclosures for Large European Undertakings
Latham & Watkins Capital Markets Practice 30 March 2017 Number 2105 Italy Implements Directive Requiring Non-Financial Disclosures for Large European Undertakings Large public-interest companies and parent
More informationLatham & Watkins Corporate Department
Number 1069 August 5, 2010 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Corporate Department New FINRA Rule 5141 to Replace Current Papilsky Rules Relating to the Sale of Securities in Fixed Price Offerings However,
More informationIs the SEC s Proposed Best Interest Standard for Broker- Dealers in Anyone s Best Interest?
Latham & Watkins Financial Institutions Industry Group May 16, 2018 Number 2323 Is the SEC s Proposed Best Interest Standard for Broker- Dealers in Anyone s Best Interest? Proposal seeks to clarify and
More informationLatham & Watkins Corporate Department
Number 1260 November 22, 2011 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Corporate Department The Limits of Control: Private Funds and the Large Trader Rule... investment advisers to private funds should consider updating
More informationUNCITRAL Rules or the Rules ), which has been widely applied. acknowledged as the most successful and representative arbitration
The latest development of the practice of the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules in China The UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules (hereinafter as the UNCITRAL Rules or the Rules ), which has been widely applied both in
More informationClient Alert. UAE Funds Update: Arrival of the UAE s New Investment Funds Regulation. Summary of the Key Changes
Number 1380 9 August 2012 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Corporate Department UAE Funds Update: Arrival of the UAE s New Investment Funds Regulation The Regulation marks a significant step in the development
More informationWhat the Supreme Court s Whistleblower Decision Means for Companies
Latham & Watkins White Collar Defense and Investigations, Securities Litigation & Professional Liability, and Supreme Court and Appellate Practices February 28, 2018 Number 2284 What the Supreme Court
More informationClient Alert. IRS Issues Final Regulations on Noncompensatory Partnership Options
Number 1471 February 19, 2013 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Tax Department IRS Issues Final Regulations on Noncompensatory Partnership Options On February 4, 2013, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) released
More informationClient Alert. CFTC Proposes to Exempt Certain Energy-Related Transactions from Derivatives Regulations. Overview
Number 1402 September 20, 2012 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Corporate Department CFTC Proposes to Exempt Certain Energy-Related Transactions from Derivatives Regulations Overview Once these orders become
More informationClient Alert. IRS Relaxes Standard of Relief for Failing to File Gain Recognition Agreements. Background
Number 1464 February 6, 2013 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Tax Department IRS Relaxes Standard of Relief for Failing to File Gain Recognition Agreements The proposed regulations recognize that full gain
More informationThe Last Days of Disco Ops
Latham & Watkins Capital Markets Practice Group March 11, 2014 Number 1660 The Last Days of Disco Ops Consider this scenario: Staying Alive, Inc., a publicly traded clothing company based in South Beach,
More informationA Series of Fortunate Events
Number 973 18 January 2010 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Corporate Department Changes in Regulation of Derivatives and Repo Transactions in Russia The Amendments almost by accident spawned a more general
More informationapplicable to the rights of shareholders of listed companies, as outlined below. Scope of the Decree
Number 998 22 March 2010 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Corporate Department Implementation of Directive 2007/36/CE on Shareholders Rights Directive 2007/36/ CE... introduc[es] several significant amendments
More informationClient Alert. Number July Latham & Watkins Tax Department
Number 1375 31 July 2012 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Tax Department Spain s Tax Reform Introduces a New Special Tax Applicable to Dividends and Capital Gains Derived From Foreign Subsidiaries not Qualifying
More informationClient Alert. CFTC Publishes Guidance on Expansive New CPO and CTA Regulations
Number 1385 August 20, 2012 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Corporate Department The CPO-CTA Q&A attempts to clarify many of the issues that have been raised [in relation to several new expansive regulations],
More informationArthur X. DONG. Partner, AnJie Law Firm. CONTACT INFORMATION Direct: Fax:
26 F, Tower D, Central International Trade Center A6 Jianguomenwai Avenue, Chaoyang District Beijing, 100022, P. R. China Tel : (86 10) 8567 5988 Fax: (86 10) 8567 5999 http://www.anjielaw.com Arthur X.
More informationClient Alert. Recent Changes to CONSOB Rules on Cash Tender Offers and Exchange Offers for Debt Securities Extended into Italy
Number 1230 6 September 2011 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Corporate Department Recent Changes to CONSOB Rules on Cash Tender Offers and Exchange Offers for Debt Securities Extended into Italy Recent changes
More informationTreasury Issues Final and Temporary Regulations on Related-Party Debt Instruments
Latham & Watkins Tax Practice October 26, 2016 Number 2023 Treasury Issues Final and Temporary Regulations on Related-Party Debt Instruments Seeking to curb excessive use of related-party debt, Treasury
More informationFollowing the BEAT: IRS Issues Proposed Regulations on Application of Base Erosion and Anti-Abuse Tax
Latham & Watkins Transactional Tax Practice January 14, 2019 Number 2433 Following the BEAT: IRS Issues Proposed Regulations on Application of Base Erosion and Anti-Abuse Tax The proposed regulations provide
More informationSEC Approves Amendments to Rule 15c2-12
Number 1039 June 8, 2010 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Tax Department SEC Approves Amendments to Rule 15c2-12 For issuers or obligated parties with any currently outstanding municipal securities, including
More informationImplementing the New Revenue Recognition Rules in 2018
Implementing the New Revenue Recognition Rules in 2018 Steven B. Stokdyk January 9, 2018 Latham & Watkins operates worldwide as a limited liability partnership organized under the laws of the State of
More informationLatham & Watkins Corporate & Finance Departments
Number 1204 June 20, 2011 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Corporate & Finance Departments After the Credit Crunch: Venture Credit Facilities at the Term Sheet Stage This Alert highlights some of the key
More informationDerivatives Under the New Italian Takeover Bids Regulation
Number 1231 6 September 2011 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Corporate Department Derivatives Under the New Italian Takeover Bids Regulation Under the new CONSOB regulation on takeover bids, derivatives
More informationLatham & Watkins Corporate and Litigation Departments. CMS Issues Proposed Regulations Interpreting the Physician Payment Sunshine Act
Number 1266 December 19, 2011 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Corporate and Litigation Departments CMS Issues Proposed Regulations Interpreting the Physician Payment Sunshine Act CMS estimates the average
More informationHong Kong s SFC Issues Significant Announcements on the Regulation of Virtual Assets
Latham & Watkins Financial Regulatory Practice 6 November 2018 Number 2406 Hong Kong s SFC Issues Significant Announcements on the Regulation of Virtual Assets The SFC has outlined its regulatory approach
More informationJONES DAY COMMENTARY
April 2012 JONES DAY COMMENTARY CIETAC Issues New Arbitration Rules: Interim Measures and Consolidation Among the Highlights On February 3, 2012, the China Council for the Promotion of International Trade
More informationClient Alert. Amendments to the Prospectus and Transparency Directives. Summary of Key Changes
Number 1121 18 January 2011 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Finance Department Amendments to the Prospectus and Transparency Directives Wholesale debt issuers should pay particular attention to the limited
More informationClient Alert. CFTC Issues a Flurry of No-Action Letters and Guidance as New Swap Regulations Become Effective. Swap Entity Definition Guidance
Number 1425 November 6, 2012 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Corporate Department CFTC Issues a Flurry of No-Action Letters and Guidance as New Swap Regulations Become Effective Between October 10 and October
More informationDr. Wang Wenying Secretary General of CIETAC Hong Kong Arbitration Center
Hot Topics on CIETAC Arbitration Dr. Wang Wenying Secretary General of CIETAC Hong Kong Arbitration Center 1 Dr. Wang Wenying Secretary General, CIETAC Hong Kong Arbitration Center CMAC Hong Kong Arbitration
More informationINTERNATIONAL ENERGY LAW, CONTRACTS AND NEGOTIATIONS
INTERNATIONAL ENERGY LAW, CONTRACTS AND NEGOTIATIONS MICHAEL P. DARDEN LATHAM & WATKINS LLP DUE DILIGENCE FOR INTERNATIONAL PETROLEUM TRANSACTIONS HOUSTON, TEXAS SEPTEMBER 23, 2013 Latham & Watkins operates
More informationVolcker Rule: An Initial Look at Significant Changes
Latham & Watkins Financial Institutions Group Number 1626 December 23, 2013 Volcker Rule: An Initial Look at Significant Changes On December 10, 2013 the US federal banking agencies, 1 along with the Securities
More informationPractical Tips on Commencement of Arbitration
2016/SOM1/EC/WKSP1/008 Session 7 Practical Tips on Commencement of Arbitration Submitted by: Hong Kong, China Workshop on Dispute Resolution Lima, Peru 26 February 2016 APEC Economic Committee Workshop
More informationLatham & Watkins Corporate & Finance Departments
Number 912 3. August 2009 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Corporate & Finance Departments The Implementation of the European Acquisitions Directive by the Regulation on Ownership Control Novelties Regarding
More informationIRS Issues Proposed Regulations on Business Interest Deduction Limitations
Latham & Watkins Tax Practice December 19, 2018 Number 2423 IRS Issues Proposed Regulations on Business Interest Deduction Limitations Proposed regulations under Section 163(j) governing business interest
More informationCMS Proposes New Medicare Reporting and Payment System for Laboratories
Latham & Watkins Healthcare and Life Sciences Practice Group November 9, 2015 Number 1891 CMS Proposes New Medicare Reporting and Payment System for Laboratories Proposed rule will create significant,
More informationSession 3: Challenges and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards in Asia
Session 3: Challenges and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards in Asia Moderator: Renato S Grion Partner, Pinheiro Neto Advogados Speakers: Mark Goodrich Partner, White & Case James Rogers Partner, Norton Rose
More informationRooftop plants with an installed capacity lower than 1 MW.
Number 1199 6 June 2011 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Corporate Department The Fourth FiT Decree Provides for a New Incentive Scheme Relating to PV Plants Entering into Operation Between June 1, 2011 and
More informationKey changes to the CIETAC Arbitration Rules
Key changes to the CIETAC Arbitration Rules Kluwer Arbitration Blog April 11, 2012 Justin D'Agostino (Herbert Smith Freehills) Please refer to this post as: Justin D'Agostino, Key changes to the CIETAC
More informationIntroduction to Commercial Arbitration in China
Introduction to Commercial Arbitration in China Li Hu I. Chinese Arbitration Act 1994 Arbitration Legislation Chinese special culture has fostered the fine tradition of resolving disputes through arbitration,
More informationLatham & Watkins Capital Markets Practice Group
Number 986 February 11, 2010 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Capital Markets Practice Group Testing the Waters Ahead of Exchange Offers C&DI 139.29, coupled with the Staff s informal interpretation of Rules
More informationCase Study Mobily Refinancing 12 November 2012
Case Study Mobily Refinancing 12 November 2012 Latham & Watkins operates worldwide as a limited liability partnership organized under the laws of the State of Delaware (USA) with affiliated limited liability
More informationClient Alert. CMS Announces Final Regulations Interpreting the Physician Payment Sunshine Act. A. Definitions and Exclusions
Number 1469 February 18, 2013 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Corporate Department CMS Announces Final Regulations Interpreting the Physician Payment Sunshine Act To avoid significant penalties for non-compliance,
More informationCFTC Proposes New Enforcement Authority and Other Amendments in Its Whistleblower Program
Latham & Watkins White Collar Defense and Investigations Practice, Financial Institutions Group and Energy Oil & Gas Industry Group September 8, 2016 Number 2005 CFTC Proposes New Enforcement Authority
More informationDr Helena H. C. Chen ( 陈希佳博士 )
Dr Helena H. C. Chen ( 陈希佳博士 ) Pinsent Masons LLP Partner / Joint Head of Office - China T: +86 10 8519 0098 M: +86 13810055060 E: Helena.chen@pinsentmasons.com Helena is qualified in Taiwan, Mainland
More informationFinal Regulations Adopt Most Proposed Regulations
Number 591 April 16, 2007 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Tax Department Final Regulations under Section 409A Important Issues for Stock Options and Other Stock Rights In general, the final regulations under
More informationConference on Dispute Resolution in Asia and Beyond: Progress and Trends
Conference on Dispute Resolution in Asia and Beyond: Progress and Trends Connie Fan Multi-media Conference Room 4/F Cheng Yick-chi Building, City University of Hong Kong 17-18 May 2018 (Thursday Friday)
More informationInternational Investment Arbitration in
INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION TEAM International Investment Arbitration in the Middle Elevator East: Year Speeches in Review 0 International investment arbitration also known as investment treaty arbitration
More informationClient Alert. Introduction. The Liquidity Practice
Number 870 27 May 2009 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Corporate Department Listed Companies and Transactions Involving Their Own Shares: CONSOB Approves Two Market Practices Concerning Liquidity Transactions
More informationCMAC HONG KONG ARBITRATION CENTER. Dr. Wang Wenying Secretary General of CMAC HKAC
CMAC HONG KONG ARBITRATION CENTER Dr. Wang Wenying Secretary General of CMAC HKAC CMAC 21st November 1958 82nd Plenary Session of the State Council adopted a resolution to create Maritime Arbitration Commission
More informationUnauthorized Amiable Compositeur?
Unauthorized Amiable Compositeur? Kiev Arbitration Days Think Big! Dr. Mark C. Hilgard Partner +49 69 7941 2271 mhilgard@mayerbrown.com 14 November 2013 Mayer Brown is a global legal services provider
More informationDISPUTE RESOLUTION AND GOVERNING LAW CLAUSES IN CHINA-RELATED COMMERCIAL CONTRACTS LEGAL GUIDE FIFTH EDITION
DISPUTE RESOLUTION AND GOVERNING LAW CLAUSES IN CHINA-RELATED COMMERCIAL CONTRACTS LEGAL GUIDE FIFTH EDITION Published November 2012 01 DISPUTE RESOLUTION AND GOVERNING LAW CLAUSES HERBERT SMITH FREEHILLS
More informationLatham & Watkins Greater China Practice
Number 386 August 2003 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Greater China Practice Joint ventures are the most popular form of foreign direct investment in the PRC, not only because they were the first business
More informationDanny McFadden. Really understands how to work well with parties from different cultures
CEDR Accreditation: CEDR Panel Admission: 2000 2004 Languages: Location: English Mandarin China Really understands how to work well with parties from different cultures Mediation Feedback Danny McFadden
More informationClient Alert. CFTC Issues Proposals on the Extraterritorial Application of US Swaps Regulations. Overview
Number 1359 July 6, 2012 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Corporate Department CFTC Issues Proposals on the Extraterritorial Application of US Swaps Regulations The Releases set forth a complex and intertwined
More informationFinnish Arbitration Act (23 October 1992/967)
Finnish Arbitration Act (23 October 1992/967) Comments of the Secretariat of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) on the basis of the unofficial translation from Finnish
More informationThe Latest Innovation for Mediation in China From the Perspective of SCIA
The Latest Innovation for Mediation in China From the Perspective of SCIA Dr. LIU Xiaochun Secretary-General Shenzhen Court of International Arbitration Background Mediation in China: long history Commercial
More informationWhistleblower Update MAPI LAW COUNCIL MEETING FALL Miriam Fisher Eric Swibel November 9, 2017
MAPI LAW COUNCIL MEETING FALL 2017 Whistleblower Update Miriam Fisher Eric Swibel November 9, 2017 Latham & Watkins operates worldwide as a limited liability partnership organized under the laws of the
More information2016 RUSSIAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION SURVEY: THE IMPACT OF SANCTIONS ON COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION
2016 RUSSIAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION SURVEY: THE IMPACT OF SANCTIONS ON COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION Contents Introduction...................................................................................
More informationMiddle East Sovereign and Quasi-Sovereign Bonds in Ltd. Laffan Liquefied Natural Gas Company Limited (3))
Number 915 10 August 2009 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Corporate Department Assessing the Middle East Sovereign Bond Market For the first time in recent memory, Gulf countries are seeking external capital
More informationShanghai International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (Shanghai International Arbitration Center) Arbitration Rules
Shanghai International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (Shanghai International Arbitration Center) Effective as from May 1, 2013 CONTENTS of Shanghai International Economic and Trade Arbitration
More informationLatham & Watkins Litigation Department
Number 1026 May 14, 2010 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Litigation Department US Sentencing Commission Approves Proposed Amendments to Federal Sentencing Guidelines for Organizations and Expands and Clarifies
More informationSFC reprimands and fines Guotai Junan Securities (Hong Kong) Limited $1.3 million
SFC reprimands and fines Guotai Junan Securities (Hong Kong) Limited $1.3 million Securities & Futures Commission of Hong Kong Home News & announcements News All news SFC reprimands and fines Guotai Junan
More informationAB 617 & Extension of California s Cap-and-Trade Program
AB 617 & Extension of California s Cap-and-Trade Program A&MWA West Coast Section Annual Conference Joshua T. Bledsoe September 21, 2017 Latham & Watkins operates worldwide as a limited liability partnership
More informationComparison between SCC arbitration and CIETAC arbitration
1 Comparison between SCC arbitration and CIETAC arbitration by Dai Wen 1 and Linn Bergman 2 General Comparison The rules of the SCC and the CIETAC are similar in many ways. Both rules respect party autonomy,
More informationLatham & Watkins Tax Department
Number 584 April 4, 2007 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Tax Department Cross-Border Financings: US Tax Authorities Target Structured Finance Arbitrage and Double Dip Losses There are three categories of
More informationGENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS APPLICABLE TO NORTHBOUND TRADING OF SHARES THROUGH CHINA CONNECT MARKET
This document is subject to change upon finalisation of the China Connect Rules. Neither these China Connect Terms nor any information contained herein constitutes or forms part of any offer or invitation
More informationShould you have any enquiry, please call our Customer Service Hotline on or visit any of our branches.
10 November 2017 Dear Valued Customer, Re: Notice of Amendments to Terms and Conditions for SCB JETCO Pay Service Thank you for choosing our SCB JETCO Pay Service. We would like to inform you that effective
More informationCHINA CONNECT SUPPLEMENTAL TERMS
CHINA CONNECT SUPPLEMENTAL TERMS At any time you place an order with us or otherwise engage in a transaction with us under China Connect, these terms are deemed to apply to such order or transaction. 1
More informationANATOMY OF INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION. E. Y. Park Co-Head, International Arbitration & Litigation Group Kim & Chang 12 February 2018
ANATOMY OF INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION E. Y. Park Co-Head, International Arbitration & Litigation Group Kim & Chang 12 February 2018 What is International Arbitration? Traditional Method of Dispute Resolution
More informationAsian Dispute Review october 2013 pp Asian Dispute Review. Since 1999 October 2013
Asian Dispute Review october 2013 pp. 113-160 Asian Dispute Review Since 1999 October 2013 Sponsored by Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre Hong Kong Institute of ArbitratorS Chartered Institute
More informationThe New Arbitration Law in Qatar and the UNCITRAL model law: Key differences
The New Arbitration Law in Qatar and the UNCITRAL model law: Key differences Philip Norman Simmons & Simmons Middle East LLP 20 March 2018 Contents Requirements for arbitrators Arbitrators liability Stay
More informationIdea to Liquidity & Beyond: Financing
Seminar Series: Startup Law 101 for Entrepreneurs Idea to Liquidity & Beyond: Financing Patrick Pohlen and Ben Potter, Latham & Watkins LLP October 10, 2017 Latham & Watkins operates worldwide as a limited
More information(Beijing, 9.XI.2006) Article 1. Definitions
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA ON THE PROMOTION AND RECIPROCAL PROTECTION OF INVESTMENTS (Beijing, 9.XI.2006) The Government
More informationFinancial Statement Requirements in US Securities Offerings. What You Need to Know Edition
Financial Statement Requirements in US Securities Offerings What You Need to Know 2018 Edition FINANCIAL STATEMENT REQUIREMENTS IN US SECURITIES OFFERINGS: WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW 2018 Edition Alexander
More informationTAXATION AND FOREIGN EXCHANGE
TAXATION The following is a summary of certain PRC and Hong Kong tax consequences to investors purchased under the [REDACTED] and held as capital assets. This summary does not purport to address all material
More informationCalifornia Climate Regulation Post-2020
California Climate Regulation Post-2020 Law Seminars International Electric Power in California Conference November 4, 2016 Joshua T. Bledsoe Latham & Watkins operates worldwide as a limited liability
More informationClient Alert. Two Recent Decisions Highlight Pitfalls in Creating and Implementing Key Employee Incentive Plans for Executives in Bankruptcy Cases
Number 1404 September 24, 2012 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Finance Department Two recent bankruptcy court decisions highlight that if a proposed insider incentive plan does not require insiders to meet
More informationAny dispute arising from or in connection with this Contract shall be submitted to Shanghai International Arbitration Center for arbitration.
Any dispute arising from or in connection with this Contract shall be submitted to Shanghai International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission for arbitration. Any dispute arising from or in connection
More informationLatham & Watkins Distressed Credit Markets Advisory Group
Number 842 March 26, 2009 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Distressed Credit Markets Advisory Group Federal Reserve Bank of New York Revises and Expands the Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility We have
More informationBANK OF CHINA LIMITED
Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing Limited and The Stock Exchange of Hong Kong Limited take no responsibility for the contents of this announcement, make no representation as to its accuracy or completeness
More informationHong Kong International Arbitration Centre SECURITIES ARBITRATION RULES. Securities Arbitration Rules. adopted to take effect from 1 July 1993
Securities Arbitration Rules Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre SECURITIES ARBITRATION RULES adopted to take effect from 1 July 1993 Section 1 Introductory Rules Scope of Application Article 1
More informationThe Republic of China Arbitration Law
The Republic of China Arbitration Law Amended on June 24, 1998 Effective as of December 24, 1998 Articles 8, 54, and 56 are as amended and effective as of July 10, 2002 In case of any discrepancies between
More informationStates: Year in Review 2015
INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION TEAM International Investment Arbitration in the Commonwealth Elevator Speeches of Independent States: Year in Review 205 International investment arbitration also known as investment
More informationArbitration for disputes with companies from Taiwan
Arbitration for disputes with companies from Taiwan Dr. Wan-Rong Chang-Schöne LL.M. (Arizona, U.S.A.) (I) CEAC as a neutral organization (II) Arbitration under the UNCITRAL concept in Taiwan (III) Recognition
More informationGuide to Chinese Share Classes v1.2
Guide to Chinese Share Classes v1.2 ftserussell.com April 2017 Guide to Chinese Share Classes China incorporated companies listed in the People s Republic of China (PRC) can issue different classes of
More informationANNUAL GENERAL MEETING FOR THE YEAR 2016 HELD ON 27 JUNE 2017 POLL RESULTS
Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing Limited and The Stock Exchange of Hong Kong Limited take no responsibility for the contents of this announcement, make no representation as to its accuracy or completeness
More informationYour Arbitration Agreement Matters: Tips for Drafting Effective Arbitration Clauses in the U.S. Andrew Behrman February 2017
Your Arbitration Agreement Matters: Tips for Drafting Effective Arbitration Clauses in the U.S. Andrew Behrman February 2017 Tips for Drafting Effective Arbitration Clauses 1. Why Are You Choosing Arbitration?
More information60 TH UIA CONGRESS BUDAPEST/HUNGARY - OCTOBER 28 - NOVEMBER 1, 2016
60 TH UIA CONGRESS BUDAPEST/HUNGARY - OCTOBER 28 - NOVEMBER 1, 2016 ARBITRATION COMMISSION: Hong Kong Bar Association/Shanghai Bar Association: FOREIGN INVESTMENT DISPUTE RESOLUTION BETWEEN CHINESE AND
More informationTaking Security in Uganda A Comparative Guide for Investors
Taking Security in Uganda A Comparative Guide for Investors ABOUT THIS GUIDE In light of Africa s sustained economic growth over the last decade, the continent has become an increasingly attractive destination
More informationMLP Tax & Legislative Panel
MLP Tax & Legislative Panel Wells Fargo Securities 2013 Pipeline, MLP, and Energy Symposium Rob Baldwin (PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP) Tim Fenn (Latham & Watkins LLP) Tom Ford (Andrews Kurth LLP) December
More informationFinancial Statement Requirements in US Securities Offerings. What Non-US Issuers Need to Know Edition
Financial Statement Requirements in US Securities Offerings What Non-US Issuers Need to Know 2018 Edition FINANCIAL STATEMENT REQUIREMENTS IN US SECURITIES OFFERINGS: WHAT NON-US ISSUERS NEED TO KNOW
More information