Litigation and Alternative Dispute Resolution

Limitation Act (NSW)

The Limitation Act 1969 (NSW) (the Act) governs the length of time after which actions to recover debts can no longer be commenced. Where the period has expired the debt is referred to as ‘statute-barred’.

There are many different types of contracts under which debts may arise. They include fixed term loans (such as personal loans), credit card contracts, home loans and contracts for the purchase of goods such as hire-purchase agreements.  The type of contract under which the debt arises is critical in determining whether a 6 year or a 12 year limitation period applies.

Unsecured vs secured debts

Agreements to loan money or provide credit often include an arrangement whereby the lender can realise property of the borrower if the borrower defaults on their obligations. This property is knows as security, and the debt will be classed as a secured debt. A mortgage is a common form of security. Where the debt is unsecured, a claim to recover the debt must be commenced within 6 years from the date that debt first became due (section 14 of the Act), which will usually be the date the borrower defaulted.

Read more: Is my claim for the debt statute-barred?

Important steps have been taken in the resolution of disputes through arbitration in Turkey, in order to incentivize parties to include arbitration clauses into their agreements. Especially with the establishment of the Istanbul Arbitration Centre ("ISTAC"), parties have been informed on the resolution of disputes through arbitration, and have been encouraged to include arbitration clauses into the agreements they conclude. Within this context, new laws and regulations have been adopted in order to facilitate the inclusion of arbitration clauses by public authorities and institutions.

A current development in arbitration, pertaining to the possibility to include an arbitration clause in agreements concluded under Public Procurement Contracts Law numbered 47351, is analyzed in this article.

Read the entire article.

Author: Tilbe Birengel

Cost allocation in international arbitration is a significant concern for the parties of the dispute, as well as a debated topic among the practitioners and the scholars. The costs associated with arbitration may be grouped as procedural and parties' costs1. While procedural costs may be illustrated as fees and expenses of the arbitrators, in addition to the administrative expenses of the arbitration institution, the party costs consist of fees and expenses incurred due to a party's presentation of its case before the arbitral tribunal2.
The Methods for Allocation of Costs
In terms of cost allocation, international arbitration practice has broad flexibility. There is no uniform approach towards the division of costs among the parties of the dispute; hence, the discretion of arbitral tribunals is remarkably divergent in this field. Although this variance appears to create obscurity in costs allocation at first glance, there are three approaches that are commonly used by the practitioners, which are: the Costs Follow the Event; the Apportionment of Costs and the American Rule.

Read the entire article.

Contact: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

As a current practice, expedited procedure rules have been introduced as a remedy against the rising time and costs of arbitration proceedings, in principle, to be applied if the amount in dispute does not exceed a certain threshold. International arbitration aims to resolve disputes in a timely and cost-efficient manner, which would be achieved through a special procedure to be applied in order to ensure this efficiency.

Current issues in expedited procedures, which are found under various institutional arbitration rules, shall be analyzed in this newsletter article.

Read more: Current Issues in Expedited Procedures in Arbitration

Contact: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.


The effect of the principle of separability on determination of the law applicable to arbitration agreements was examined, and the doctrine and court opinions were summarized in the July, 2017, issue of the Newsletter1. As mentioned in the said article, the arbitration agreement may be governed by the law applicable to the underlying contract, or by a different law. In such case, the arbitration agreement can often be governed by the law of the seat of arbitration or some national laws and international principles. In this article, certain court decisions and arbitral awards supporting the aforesaid opinions have been compiled.

Read more: The Effect of the Principle of Separability on Determination of the Law Applicable to Arbitration...