Dispute resolution statistics published by the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) offer compelling evidence that, five years on from the UK’s departure from the EU, the choice of a London arbitral seat and/or English law to govern a dispute enjoys a continued pre-eminence for parties negotiating commercial arrangements. Of 841 new ICC arbitration filings in 2024, London emerged once again as the single most frequently selected seat, hosting 96 cases or 13.4% of all places of arbitration in cases registered last year.
In parallel, English law remained the leading choice of substantive law, governing 125 or 15% of newly filed cases, with laws of US states (including New York) trailing in second place, selected as the lex contractus in 69 cases.
The persistent dominance of London-seated, English-law-governed arbitration disputes – within this most international of arbitral institutions – highlights the UK’s position as the leading global hub for complex commercial dispute resolution.
It is particularly notable that the attraction of arbitrating in London does not appear to have been impacted by discussions surrounding perceived complexities in the recognition and enforcement of court judgments (as opposed to arbitration awards) between UK and EU states, post-Brexit. One of arbitration’s great advantages over court litigation has long been the application of the United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (New York Convention) to eligible arbitral awards. This may overcome concerns regarding enforcement risks where the seat of the arbitration and the location for potential enforcement both fall within signatory states under that convention. Moreover, this feature has proved particularly valuable in the wake of Brexit, as well as in a world where increased international conflict appears sadly to have become a reality.
Aside from the above, the ICC statistics suggest that parties recognised that the choice of a London arbitration seat preserved access to experienced courts and judges in support of the arbitral process. It remains the case that many international contracts continue to point to London for similar reasons, including its perceived neutrality, the sophistication of its legal infrastructure, and the quality of its output. Likewise, the continued influx of construction/engineering and energy disputes – 44% of newly registered ICC cases arose from those sectors – aligns well with the prevalence of available specialist legal counsel expertise in these fields which London offers.
The 2024 figures also illustrate that parties do not automatically pair English law with an English place of arbitration. There were 29 more arbitrations containing a choice of English law than those with a London seat. This presumably reflects wider strategic considerations. English law offers (among other benefits) well-developed principles of contractual construction and commercial certainty – advantages that remain unaffected by geopolitical events. Parties are, one may surmise, attracted by the choice of English law for complex commercial transactions, even when these involve cross-border counterparties and operations, and even when the arbitration is not seated in London. The system that applies such law, and anterior to that creates and develops it, is perceived as reliable and robust.
According to these latest ICC statistics, by year-end 2024, the aggregate value of the total ICC caseload was $354bn [£283bn] – a staggering figure and itself a new record. In 2024, the average amount in dispute in newly registered ICC cases was $130m and the aggregate amount in new cases was $102bn. These metrics are far greater than in 2023 ($65m and $53bn respectively). As ever, it will be interesting to see if that growth can be sustained.
Looking ahead to this year, the picture for the UK as a dispute resolution hub looks ever brighter.
The Arbitration Act 2025, which received royal assent in February, confirmed a tribunal’s power to issue awards on a summary basis and strengthened the role of emergency arbitrators. This is a facet of arbitration which has generated considerable interest across arbitral centres internationally (even if in respect of availability, more than utilisation). The act will solidify London’s competitive edge among other popular forums for arbitrations. Looking to the courts, the entry into force of the Hague Judgments Convention 2019 in the UK on 1 July provides a clear framework for intra-European enforcement of civil and commercial judgments, after many years of post-Brexit uncertainty. The improved certainty and further empowerment of London-seated tribunals indicates that 2025 looks set to hold even greater promise for the London-focused disputes scene.
David Edwards and Amy Volz, Simpson, Thacher & Bartlett
No comments yet