Freehills' clients benefit from our extensive arbitration experience across a wide range of diverse industries. We work closely with our expert industry groups to provide commercially-focused advice in specific industry contexts.  Our recent experience includes the resolution of disputes through arbitration in areas such as pharmaceuticals, telecommunications, project and construction and energy & resources.

Freehills provides expertise in both:

• domestic arbitration, and
• international arbitration.

Our arbitration team is able to quickly mobilise to assist clients in the resolution of disputes around the globe.  We have advised and represented clients in relation to arbitration processes and transnational litigation throughout Australia, South-East Asia, Hong Kong, Europe, North America, South America and Central Asia. 

Freehills has extensive international networks to procure prompt and reliable advice on local law issues relevant to an international dispute.

Freehills’ Arbitration and International Dispute Resolution teams have acted in a large number of complex and challenging disputes.  Examples include:

• Indian pipeline arbitration – disputes arose between a subcontractor and principal contractor in relation to a major Indian multipurpose pipeline project. The contract was governed by Swiss law. The disputes were determined under the Rules of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), before a panel of three arbitrators in Lausanne, Switzerland and Paris, France. Parallel court proceedings were conducted in Italy, Australia, India and the Czech Republic on discrete issues such as the draw down of bank guarantees and the securing of assets.
• Hong Kong telecommunications dispute – acting for a major telecom in relation to a dispute involving ICC arbitration with the place of arbitration in Hong Kong.
• European pharmaceutical dispute – acting for companies in the Netherlands and Switzerland in dispute with an Australian pharmaceutical company. The dispute resolution process was ICC arbitration.
• Singapore gas pipeline arbitration – disputes arose over the design and construction of a gas pipeline in Singapore. Parallel arbitration proceedings were conducted in Singapore, the first under the Rules of the Singapore Centre for International Arbitration, the latter on the basis of ad hoc arbitration. Related proceedings were initiated in the Singaporean and Australian courts and settlement was achieved before final hearing of all proceedings.
• Philippines and Singapore in hydro-electricity dispute – a substantial hydro-electricity project in the Philippines suffered substantial disputation. The governing law was the law of the Philippines and the venue for the arbitration was Singapore. The disputes were to be resolved under the ICC Rules. Difficult issues associated with jurisdiction and applicable law threatened to de-rail the process. We were able to expeditiously achieve successful rulings to facilitate this ICC arbitration. Parallel court proceedings were conducted in the Philippines in relation to the draw down of letters of credit.
• Engineering, procurement and construction contract – significant issues arose towards the end of substantial engineering, procurement and construction contract for a major processing plant in Australia. Federal Court proceedings were initiated to preserve claims under the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) (TPA). The dispute was otherwise going to be resolved by arbitration involving several international parties.
• Contractual disputes requiring arbitration – a shopping centre redevelopment was governed by contracts requiring disputes to be referred to arbitration. The project was substantially prolonged and there were significant cost overruns. Issues in dispute included claims for extensions of time and liquidated damages, arguments of prevention, concurrent delay and penalties, arguments as to scope, TPA claims, practical completion issues and various contractual and payment claims.
• Warehouse development dispute – a warehouse development had been proceeding smoothly until it was recognised towards the end of the project that construction activities substantially departed from approved plans in a number of respects. Importantly, this would give rise to substantial loss and damage, including pure economic loss, during the future intended use of various parts of the facilities. Disputes arose and were referred to arbitration. The issues in dispute included arguments as to the scope of work, responsibility for design, recoverability of economic and future loss, quantification of losses, defect rectification, rebuilding obligations, duty of care issues and security for costs.
• Public infrastructure project involved in cross claims – the progress of an important public infrastructure project began to slow dramatically. Substantial claims ultimately arose and were referred to arbitration, including various cross claims.

Arbitration has become a very attractive and popular alternative to litigation in Australia.  It offers privacy, flexibility and cost efficiency when well managed by arbitration experts. 
In the international context, arbitration is widely accepted as the appropriate dispute resolution process.  This wide acceptance derives from the benefits to parties under the New York Convention for the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in over 140 countries around the world.

Our experienced team applies a commercial and strategic approach to arbitration to maximise the benefits for our clients, including the development and implementation of creative resolution strategies.

Legal guides

• Asia-Pacific Legal 500, top tier ranking in Dispute Resolution 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010
• Chambers Global, top tier ranking in Dispute Resolution, 2006, 2007, 2008 
• Best Lawyers International, top tier ranking in Litigation, 2008, 2009, 2010  
• Best Lawyers International, top tier ranking in International Arbitration, 2010
• PLC Which Lawyer?, top tier ranking in Dispute Resolution, 2006, 2007, 2008

Testimonials

• ‘They focus on the outcomes to be achieved rather than the process. They don't think one or two steps ahead – their advice is always what will happen three or four steps ahead.’ Chambers Global 2010
• The ‘exceptional’ Freehills is a ‘firm of choice’ for clients in major litigation, such as class action defence, providing ‘high levels of service, responsiveness and value.’ Asia-Pacific Legal 500 2010 
• ‘excellent lawyers who always meet deadlines and are universally great to deal with.’ Chambers Global 2009 
• ‘The dispute resolution team at Freehills remains a strong choice for complex commercial disputes.’ Chambers Global 2009 
• Bronwyn Lincoln was awarded a Rank 1 in Dispute Resolution: Arbitration – Chambers Global 2008 and 2009 
• ‘… “(Bronwyn Lincoln) is an exceptional litigator: well organised, strategic and outstanding in the field of international arbitration.”’ Chambers Global 2009 
• ‘In addition to its “deep-rooted” litigation expertise, the firm also has significant arbitration clout on the domestic and international stages’ Chambers Global 2008