In Hrvatska Elektroprivreda v Slovenia [ICSID Case No ARB/05/24 (6 May 2008)] the defendant, in an arbitration before the International Centre for the Settlement of Investments Disputes (ICSID) waited until one week before a substantive hearing, to disclose to the tribunal and the claimant, a list of lawyers who would be attending. When disclosed, the list included a QC who was a member of the same chambers as the president of the tribunal (which is not unusual in English law proceedings). 

(1) Roger Shashoua (2) Rodemadan Holdings Ltd (3) Stancroft Trust Ltd v Mukesh Sharma [2009] EWHC 957 (Comm) involved a dispute over a shareholders agreement governed by Indian law, which contained an arbitration clause providing for an arbitration in London, under the rules of the International Chamber of Commerce (the ICC). 

Midgulf (M) was a trader in sulphur and Groupe Chimiche Tunisien (G) was a company owned by the state of Tunisia. The parties entered into a contract for the sale and purchase of sulphur in June 2008 and a further contract for the same in July 2008. The June 2008 contract contained a London arbitration clause. G complained about the quality of the sulphur provided under both contracts and subsequently terminated the July contract. A dispute arose as to whether the July 2008 contract contained a London arbitration clause.