Party Autonomy, Comity and the RusChemAlliance Saga - Journal of International Arbitration View Party Autonomy, Comity and the RusChemAlliance Saga by - Journal of International Arbitration Party Autonomy, Comity and the RusChemAlliance Saga 42 2

In September 2024, the English Supreme Court made a landmark ruling on anti-suit injunctions in UniCredit Bank GmbH v. RusChemAlliance (RCA) LLC [2024] EWCA Civ 64. This decision followed two earlier prominent judgments: Deutsche Bank v. RCA [2023] EWCA Civ 114 and Commerzbank v. RCA [2023] EWHC 2510 (Comm). This article explores this recent case law trilogy on anti-suit injunctions through two competing lenses: first, party autonomy; and second, comity and the need to respect state sovereignty. The purpose of this article is to shed light on the remaining uncertainty pertaining to how these two interests materialize in practice – particularly because of the repeated references to ‘caution’ in the commentary on anti-suit injunctions. It will be argued that, although the English case law reveals a pro-contractual enforcement and pro-arbitration approach, uncertainty and inconsistency persist in two ways: (1) the problematic application of Enka v. Chubb in determining the law governing the arbitration agreement (AA); (2) the jurisprudence on comity.

Journal of International Arbitration