Ust-Kamenogorsk Hydropower Plant JSC v. AES Ust-Kamenogorsk Hydropower Plant LLP
United Kingdom Supreme Court
Trinity Term [2013] UKSC 35 (2013)
- Written by Sara Adams, JD
Facts
Ust-Kamenogorsk Hydropower Plant JSC (JSC) (defendant) and AES Ust-Kamenogorsk Hydropower Plant LLP (AESUK) (plaintiff) were parties to a concession agreement for the operation of a hydroelectric power plant in Kazakhstan. The agreement was governed by Kazakh law and included an arbitration clause that required disputes related to the agreement be arbitrated in London, England, under the rules of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC). The Republic of Kazakhstan, JSC’s predecessor, received a judgment from the Kazakh Supreme Court that the arbitration agreement was invalid. AESUK then initiated proceedings in England. AESUK did not want to initiate arbitration proceedings, but merely sought a ruling that JSC could not bring claims falling under the arbitration agreement against AESUK in court. The lower court held that any claims related to the concession agreement, including the action in Kazakhstan, could only be resolved by arbitration at the ICC in London under ICC rules. The lower court also issued an injunction barring JSC from bringing claims elsewhere. JSC appealed. JSC argued in part that the passage of the Arbitration Act 1996 made it impermissible for an English court to hold that foreign proceedings violate an arbitration agreement if arbitration is neither ongoing nor imminent.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Mance, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 810,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
