International Arbitration

With decades of experience representing clients in arbitration, Haynes and Boone’s International Arbitration team has the knowledge and capabilities to handle a variety of matters.

International arbitration is the leading international dispute resolution method. It is essential for many cross-border transactions and projects. It enables parties working internationally to agree to have their disputes resolved confidentially, by experienced and neutral decision-makers and under a procedure that can be tailored to the particular matter. International arbitration falls into two principal categories: commercial arbitration and treaty arbitration. Investment treaty arbitration protects foreign investments and affords private investors direct, public international law remedies against the host state.

Haynes and Boone’s international arbitration lawyers have decades of experience of representing clients in arbitrations conducted under the auspices of the leading arbitral institutions, including the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) and the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA), the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (SCC), the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) and the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC). We advise in matters subject to established arbitration rules, including UNCITRAL or the London Maritime Arbitrators Association (LMAA). We also act in investment treaty arbitrations under the rules of the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID). Our lawyers have experience in both ad hoc arbitrations and in those administered by leading institutions such as the American Arbitration Association (AAA), the International Centre for Dispute Resolution (ICDR), and the China International Economic Trade and Arbitration Association (CIETAC).

Our team has a strong industry focus on energy (including oil and gas and renewables), offshore, construction, projects, engineering and infrastructure disputes. Our clients include major oil/energy companies, drilling and EPC contractors active in Europe, the United States, the Middle East, Asia and Africa. We also regularly handle complex commercial disputes in the corporate, banking, finance, hospitality, shipping, technology (IP/IT), pharmaceutical, insurance, aviation and other industry sectors that generate high value and complex disputes.

London is the hub of our international arbitration practice, reflecting the prevalence of English law as the governing law in international agreements and London’s leading arbitral seat position worldwide. The Legal 500, Legalease, recommends the firm for international arbitration and cites client feedback that describes the team as “excellent” with “very experienced and capable” practitioners. Individual team members have been praised for being “a forceful advocate,” “very thorough,” “highly attentive” and keeping clients informed, standing out for their “heavyweight experience in the energy sector” (The Legal 500) and being “extremely bright and passionate about …. client’s needs” (Chambers UK 2019, Chambers and Partners).

Our international arbitration team members have worked together for many years, offering clients longstanding and shared experience. Senior practitioners regularly sit as arbitrator (appointed by the parties or arbitral institutions such as the LCIA). We have the perspective of the decision-maker, as well as that of the adviser. We pride ourselves on our responsiveness, strategic and commercial outlook, client commitment and cost-effectiveness. We regularly appear as advocates before international arbitral tribunals and courts, allowing us to handle a case right from the outset until a final hearing, if no commercial settlement can be achieved.

The team would be delighted to assist with any queries.

Show More
Alerts
Arbitration in the Fifth - March 2024
April 11, 2024

In March 2024, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals issued two opinions addressing arbitration of insurance coverage disputes in Louisiana. In Bufkin Enters., L.L.C. v. Indian Harbor Ins. Co., the court reaffirmed its position that state law does not reverse-preempt the New York Convention and rejected the “plead and then dismiss gamesmanship” that saw foreign insurers dismissed from cases with prej [...]