The U.S. Supreme Court has been deciding cases regarding arbitration at (for them) a furious pace recently, and the latest decision (Rent-A-Center West, Inc. v. Jackson, 2010 WL 2471058 (June 21, 2010)) reconfirms the Court’s continued strong support for enforcing arbitration agreements as written, even where this deprives the courts of any significant role in [...] read more »
Archive for the 'Recent judgment' Category
FCPA Violations Now Drawing Extended Stays in Federal Pen
On Monday, April 19, 2010, a federal judge in the Eastern District of Virginia handed down “the longest-ever prison sentence” for a Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) violation. Charles Jumet was sentenced to 87 months in prison for conspiring to violate the FCPA and for making false statements to federal agents. Jumet, a vice president [...] read more »
When is a termination not a termination?
The Court ruled that by sending a letter terminating the contract in accordance with its termination procedure, Shell had “affirmed” the contract – i.e. treated it as continuing. This cost Shell about $15m.
read more »
Opening the Door to U.S. Federal Court a Wee Bit Wider
When forced to litigate in the U.S., many businesses – especially multinational ones – prefer to be in federal rather than state court. The U.S. Supreme Court just made it a bit easier to fulfill that desire.
Most construction disputes are contract cases not involving federal law, so a federal court will only have [...] read more »
Consultancy agreements and allegations of illegality
Contractors and suppliers operating abroad often conclude contracts with agents, consultants and other intermediaries who assist them in tender processes as well as in negotiating and performing contracts. Typically, these consultancy agreements provide that disputes are to be submitted to arbitration. Most disputes concern the consultants’ entitlement to a fee. In these disputes, the principal often argues that the contract was illegal under the applicable law. This notably occurred in two cases which led to two recent decisions of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court on applications to set aside or revise arbitral awards.
read more »
New decade, new development of the remoteness rule
In this, the second of my New Year updates, I would like to discuss two interesting cases which have recently been decided by the UK courts. The first is the UK Court of Appeal upholding of a first instance judgment and the comments that the Court made on the recoverability of damages under English contract law. read more »
The Procurement Process in Canada after the Supreme Court of Canada Tercon Decision*
The tendering and procurement process in Canada has traditionally been treated by the courts as a special area of contract law in which fairness and protecting the integrity of the tender process have been guiding principles. Courts have implied terms into contract “A” bid contracts that have obliged owners to act fairly, and wide discretionary clauses have been interpreted narrowly to ensure the integrity of the tendering process.
Owners looking to maximize their control over the selection of contractors have continued to fine-tune instructions to bidders and attempt to limit their own liability. How far will the courts go to intervene in these commercial contracts because of the special status historically bestowed on the tendering process? In a 5 – 4 split decision, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) has delivered its views in the case of Tercon Contractors Ltd. v. British Columbia (Ministry of Transportation and Highways), 2010 SCC 4. The SCC has highlighted the importance of maintaining the integrity of the tendering process and treating bidders fairly, but has also “laid to rest” the doctrine of fundamental breach in connection with exclusion clauses and provided guidelines for the future preparation and analysis of tender documents.
read more »
When a ‘notice’ need not be ‘noticed’
Opening the mailbox at my Hong Kong apartment block brings the usual array of bills, more bills, flyers and…what appear to be ‘notices’ (usually from my landlord): but as we know from the world of construction law, often it is argued that what is intended to be a ‘notice’ fails to meet up to the strict requirements of the contract.read more »
Litigating a dispute with French connections – the rule of exorbitant jurisdiction applied by the French courts
Continuing our discussion on issues to consider when litigating a dispute with French connections (see our last post “A Growing Trend In French Construction Law? The Recognition of Mandatory Rules by the Court of Cassation”), the following contribution highlights a further issue to be considered by parties to a construction contract when litigating as, or [...] read more »
Will Your Waiver Hold Up in Court? Time to Legislate the Bidding Process in Ontario
News that the global economy is on the mend is translating into a renewed construction industry in Ontario, particularly with the infusion of infrastructure dollars from various levels of government. From Sudbury to Sarnia, towns and cities are re-investing in new or renovated infrastructure projects. The recent Court of Appeal decision in Maystar General Contractors [...] read more »








RECENT COMMENTS