The Reko Diq project site. Photo courtesy Tethyan Copper Company Pakistan/File
ISLAMABAD: The federal government is weighing options how to deal with a recent London High Court judge’s rejection of Balochistan government’s defence before the International Chambers of Commerce (ICC) tribunal that it lacked jurisdiction to arbitrate a dispute in the Reko Diq mining venture in view of corruption allegations.
An informed source privy to the development told
Dawn that one of the options could be challenging the decision of the London High Court judge before the Court of Appeal in the United Kingdom. The International Disputes Unit (IDU) housed inside the Attorney General office in the Supreme Court building was reviewing the ruling and could reach a decision very soon, the source said, adding that a final approval about challenging the ruling was yet to taken.
Friday, December 18, 2020
INTRODUCTION
Recently, the Supreme Court of United Kingdom (“UK Supreme Court”) in Enka Insaat Ve Sanayi AS v. OOO Insurance Company Chubb,
1 (“Enka v. Chubb”) has passed a landmark ruling, where they have set out the principles to be followed for determination of the law governing the arbitration agreement. This is the first time the UK Supreme Court has clarified the position of law after a careful consideration of the earlier cases, including the famous decision of the UK Court of Appeal in Sulamerica v. Enesa Engenharia (“Sulamerica”)
2.
The UK Supreme Court has held that where the arbitration clause does not specifically mention the law governing the arbitration agreement, but however mentions the law of the main contract, then the same would normally govern the law governing the arbitration agreement. Where there is no express choice of law governing the main contract, by default, the arbitration agreement would be governed b