Conflict of Laws
  • About
  • Editorial board
  • Subscription
  • Submission
  • Materials
  • Contact
  • Click to open the search input field Click to open the search input field Search
  • Menu Menu

Investment Awards vs Sovereign Immunity: Navigating the Enforcement Maze

May 21, 2026/in Views/by Michael Douglas

By Cara North, Counsel, Ashurst

The intersection of foreign State immunity and the enforcement of international arbitral awards has been a hotly contested issues in recent years. First the question was whether a State has waived immunity from court processes concerning recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards by ratifying the 1965 Convention of Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID Convention) – to which the answer has been yes in Australia and the  England and Wales (among other jurisdictions). More recently, the question has been whether a State’s ratification of the 1958 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (New York Convention) constitutes an implicit waiver of sovereign immunity, to which the High Court of Australia most recently held no.

In CCDM Holdings, LLC v The Republic of India [2026] HCA 9, the High Court of Australia unanimously held that ratification of the New York Convention does not, of itself, waive foreign State immunity under the Foreign States Immunities Act 1985 (Cth). The decision aligns Australia with the current position in the United States, Canada, and England and Wales, reinforcing an emerging common law consensus in that regard.

Read more

https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png 0 0 Michael Douglas https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png Michael Douglas2026-05-21 13:54:052026-05-22 14:27:44Investment Awards vs Sovereign Immunity: Navigating the Enforcement Maze

Courtroom Attendance as a Forum Conveniens Factor in Hamilton v Barrow

May 21, 2026/1 Comment/in Views/by Ekaterina Pannebakker

This post is written by Timon Milan Solár, Doctoral researcher, Faculty of Law, Trnava University, Slovakia.

In October 2025, the High Court of England and Wales (King’s Bench Division) handed down its judgment in Hamilton v Barrow [2025] EWHC 2593 (KB). The case concerned a failed unregulated investment scheme that collapsed in 2017, leaving investors without the possibility of recovering their investments, which ranged from £2,930 to £410,969. At first glance, the decision discusses important procedural questions, including abuse of process and champerty. However, on closer inspection, it also raises an interesting issue of English private international law that has gone overlooked. Can courtroom attendance be a factor in the forum conveniens test?

Read more

https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png 0 0 Ekaterina Pannebakker https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png Ekaterina Pannebakker2026-05-21 09:44:522026-05-22 14:28:19Courtroom Attendance as a Forum Conveniens Factor in Hamilton v Barrow

Greenpeace Anti-SLAPP Suit Blocked by International Antisuit Injunction

May 16, 2026/in Views/by Matthias Weller

This post was written by Hannah Buxbaum, Martin Luther King Jr. Professor of Law, UC Davis School of Law. The post is cross-posted from the Transnational Litigation Blog with kind permission.

In 2019, Energy Transfer, the developer of the Dakota Access Pipeline, sued Greenpeace International, a Dutch foundation, in North Dakota state court. Last year, Greenpeace responded with an anti-SLAPP (Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation) lawsuit against Energy Transfer in Dutch court. In the latest twist in this lengthy dispute, the North Dakota Supreme Court issued an antisuit injunction last week blocking (partially) that anti-SLAPP suit.

The injunction is unusual in two respects. First, it does not actually bar Greenpeace from pursuing the Dutch action; rather, it purports to limit the issues that Greenpeace can raise in that litigation. Second, it was entered after judgment had already been reached in the North Dakota lawsuit. Read more

https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png 0 0 Matthias Weller https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png Matthias Weller2026-05-16 14:27:402026-05-16 15:18:43Greenpeace Anti-SLAPP Suit Blocked by International Antisuit Injunction

New Rules on the Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Saudi Arabia – Some Preliminary Observations

April 29, 2026/in Views/by Béligh Elbalti

Many thanks to Karim El Chazli  (Consulting and Testifying Expert on Arab Laws) for the tip-off

 

I. Introduction

The field of foreign judgments in the MENA region has witnessed additional legal developments. After Morocco, which adopted in February a new Code of Civil Procedure containing an updated regime for the enforcement of foreign judgments (see my previous on this blog), Saudi Arabia followed suit by adopting a new Execution Law (Nizam at-Tanfidh), approved by the Council of Ministers on 15 April 2026 (27–28 Shawwal 1447 H), which contains rules on the enforcement of foreign judgments. The new law replaces the existing Execution Law promulgated by Royal Decree No. M/53 of 3 July 2012 (13 Sha’baan1433 H).

Read more

https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png 0 0 Béligh Elbalti https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png Béligh Elbalti2026-04-29 05:26:332026-06-03 12:22:32New Rules on the Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Saudi Arabia – Some Preliminary Observations

Bahraini Supreme Court Accepts the Applicability of “Foreign” Jewish Customs in a Succession Case Involving Bahraini Jews

April 25, 2026/1 Comment/in Views/by Béligh Elbalti

I. Introduction

This is certainly a genuinely interesting case from Bahrain, involving the application of “foreign” Jewish customs in a succession dispute that appears to be between Jewish Bahraini nationals. Although the case seems to lack any foreign element, its relevance to conflict of laws is nonetheless clear, since – to my knowledge – this is the first case in which the applicability of “foreign” religious customs in matters of personal status has been explicitly admitted in what appears a purely domestic case. The case also provides a broader analytical framework, raising questions about the place and applicability of non-state law in private international law (this contrasts of the recent decision of the French Supreme Court denying the applicability of Jewish law, albeit in a different context) and, more generally, about the compatibility of non-Islamic religious norms with domestic public policy frameworks in Muslim-majority legal systems.

Read more

https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png 0 0 Béligh Elbalti https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png Béligh Elbalti2026-04-25 03:08:012026-06-03 12:23:05Bahraini Supreme Court Accepts the Applicability of “Foreign” Jewish Customs in a Succession Case Involving Bahraini Jews

Advocate General Emiliou’s Opinion on Case C-799/24: Res Judicata Effect Applies Despite Breach of Art 31(2) Brussels Ia

April 24, 2026/in Views/by Tobias Lutzi

by Arvid Kerschnitzki, University of Augsburg

On 23 April 2026, Advocate General Emiliou published his opinion on Case C-799/24 – Babcock Montajes S.A. v Kanadevia Inova Steinmüller GmbH. It adds another piece to the puzzle that is the CJEU’s broad interpretation of the term ‘judgment’ in the Brussels Ia Regulation. At the same time, the case highlights the persisting problems with procedural coordination under the regulation.

Read more

https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2025/10/eu-court-of-justice-213379_1920.jpg 1275 1920 Tobias Lutzi https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png Tobias Lutzi2026-04-24 09:33:582026-04-24 09:33:58Advocate General Emiliou’s Opinion on Case C-799/24: Res Judicata Effect Applies Despite Breach of Art 31(2) Brussels Ia

The New Moroccan Framework on International Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgment Enforcement – A Preliminary Critical Assessment

April 16, 2026/in Views/by Béligh Elbalti

I. Introduction

Finally out: the new Moroccan Code of Civil Procedure (Law No. 58.25), the preparation of which was previously announced on this blog, has been promulgated by Dahir (Royal Decree) No. 1.26.07 of 11 February 2026 and published in the Official Journal (Al-Jarida Ar-Rasmiyya) No. 7485 of 23 February 2026. The legislative process was fraught with difficulties, and the draft went back and forth several times before its final adoption earlier this year. The Code will enter into force six months after its publication, i.e. on 24 August 2026.

Read more

https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png 0 0 Béligh Elbalti https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png Béligh Elbalti2026-04-16 04:44:092026-06-03 12:23:39The New Moroccan Framework on International Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgment Enforcement – A Preliminary Critical Assessment

The Reception of Hilton v Guyot and Comity in the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Anglophone Africa

March 25, 2026/in Views/by Chukwuma Okoli

Introduction

Hilton v Guyot, is the most influential case in the United States—and perhaps globally—on the use of comity as a basis for recognising and enforcing foreign judgments. In that case, Justice Gray of the United States Supreme Court defined comity as follows:

“No law has any effect, of its own force, beyond the limits of the sovereignty from which its authority is derived. The extent of which the law of one nation… shall be allowed to operate within the dominion of another nation, depends upon… the “comity of nations”…” Read more

https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png 0 0 Chukwuma Okoli https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png Chukwuma Okoli2026-03-25 11:19:542026-03-26 09:29:40The Reception of Hilton v Guyot and Comity in the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Anglophone Africa

No Exequatur Granted for a Panamanian Judgment in Greece Due to Public Policy Considerations [Piraeus Court of First Instance Case No. 2040/2026, Unreported]

March 23, 2026/in Views/by Apostolos Anthimos

INTRODUCTION

Following a significant hiatus, the public policy defense has re-emerged prominently in discussions surrounding the enforcement of foreign judgments, particularly in the context of a judgment issued by the Panama Maritime Court in 2024. The primary issue addressed by the Greek court was whether a foreign judgment could be recognized and enforced when the foreign court denied appellate proceedings due to the failure to post a security deposit that was both substantial and necessary for the appeal process.

Read more

https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png 0 0 Apostolos Anthimos https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png Apostolos Anthimos2026-03-23 07:35:102026-03-23 08:01:58No Exequatur Granted for a Panamanian Judgment in Greece Due to Public Policy Considerations [Piraeus Court of First Instance Case No. 2040/2026, Unreported]

Non-Qualifying Ceremonies: The Futility of Foreign Registration of Islamic Marriages under English Law

March 22, 2026/2 Comments/in Views/by Béligh Elbalti

This blog note is kindly provided by Dr. Muhammad Zubair Abbasi (Lecturer, School of Law, Royal Holloway, University of London; zubair.abbasi@rhul.ac.uk). It follows the author’s previous post on this topic, which was published earlier on this blog. Read more

https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png 0 0 Béligh Elbalti https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png Béligh Elbalti2026-03-22 07:59:012026-03-23 08:02:22Non-Qualifying Ceremonies: The Futility of Foreign Registration of Islamic Marriages under English Law
Page 3 of 72‹12345›»

Categories

  • Views
  • News

Most Recent Posts

  • Private International Law and European Society August 4, 2026
  • The New Zealand Supreme Court’s judgment in Kea Investments Ltd v Wikeley on anti-enforcement relief August 3, 2026
  • Beyond Domicile: The BHP Litigation and the Functional Interconnection of Public and Private International Law August 3, 2026
  • Conflicts of jurisdiction in Senegal: lesson from the Senegalese Supreme Court on Lis Pendens and the Exequatur of foreign judgments July 27, 2026
  • Adoption in the proposal for a European Parenthood Regulation July 21, 2026
  • Copyright, Targeting and Geo-Blocking: The CJEU Stirs the Pot July 15, 2026
  • A Follow-Up: The German Judges Association’s Response to the HCCH Draft Text of a Future Convention on Parallel Proceedings and Related Actions July 15, 2026
  • Private International Law Dimensions of Singapore’s New Legislation to Combat Online Harms July 14, 2026
  • The 1961 HCCH Apostille Convention: Why All African Countries Should Ratify It? — Insights from Judicial Practice in Africa July 14, 2026
  • The enforcement of an advance on costs for substitute performance at the expense of a Russian debtor in German-French legal relations July 2, 2026
  • “Yes, in principle, but not quite there yet…” – Some Observations on the Public Consultation on the HCCH Draft Text of a Future Convention on Parallel Proceedings and Related Actions June 29, 2026
  • Judgment Mobility Rules in India’s Private International Law Regime: No place for a revision au fond? June 26, 2026
  • Nothing to See Here: The CJEU’s Decision in Case C-232/25 Idzinski June 18, 2026
  • Refusal to Enforce in Egypt of a Californian (U.S.) Judgment for Lack of Reciprocity: What Has Gotten into the Egyptian Supreme Court? June 15, 2026
  • PRC Double Interest neither Double nor Penal: Australian Courts Clear Its Name When Enforcing Chinese Judgments June 10, 2026
Scroll to top Scroll to top Scroll to top