International Arbitration



The International Arbitration Practice Group advises leading multinational corporations in arbitration proceedings around the world. We regularly assist clients in litigation involving arbitration issues and have represented clients in national court proceedings under the Hong Kong Arbitration Ordinance, the U.S. Federal Arbitration Act, the English Arbitration Act and the New York Convention.

The International Arbitration group’s lawyers have appeared before many of the world’s leading arbitrators and work with all major arbitral institutions and rules, including:

  • International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC)
  • Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC)
  • London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA)
  • International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)
  • American Arbitration Association (AAA)/International Centre for Dispute Resolution (ICDR)
  • Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (SCC)
  • Rules of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL)
  • Swiss Rules
  • Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC)
  • Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS)

Our practice and experience is particularly deep in the energy, telecommunications, insurance, construction, pharmaceutical and banking sectors, and our cases arise in a wide variety of contexts that include:

  • Concession and privatization agreements
  • Infrastructure projects
  • Insurance and reinsurance arrangements
  • Joint ventures
  • Licensing and distribution agreements
  • Complex financial transactions

We advise clients on each stage of the dispute resolution process, from the drafting of arbitration clauses to mediation or early neutral evaluation to the conduct of arbitration proceedings and through to the enforcement of arbitral awards.

Our international arbitration lawyers are ranked as leaders by legal publications including Chambers and PLC’s Which Lawyer?


  • A major oil company in related, multibillion dollar UNCITRAL proceedings in the Hague alleging expropriation and other violations under the Energy Charter Treaty.
  • A French power generation company in a €200 million ICC arbitration in Geneva arising from a long-term contract for supply of natural gas.
  • A European energy company in a $150 million ICC arbitration in London for a price review under a long-term contract for supply of LNG.
  • An Asian energy company in connection with ICC arbitration claims against an Asian state-owned entity under an offshore oil and gas production sharing agreement.
  • A vessel owner in related LMAA arbitration proceedings in London arising from a luxury yacht construction agreement.
  • A Middle Eastern contractor in an ICC arbitration in Paris arising from a gas plant project in Saudi Arabia.
  • – A major oil company in connection with claims under a joint venture agreement for the exploration and production of natural gas in a Central American state.
  • A major oil company in a $1.5 billion ICC arbitration in London regarding a dispute arising from the purchase and sale of an Eastern European refinery, pipeline and export company.
  • Defending U.S. court proceedings seeking to enjoin a major oil company’s investment treaty arbitration against a Central American state.
  • Multiple LCIA arbitrations representing investors in a dispute concerning ownership of a landmark Russian hotel construction and redevelopment project.
  • An Asian subsidiary of a major global mining company in connection with claims against an Asian state under a bilateral investment treaty.
  • A Brazilian mining conglomerate in an ICC arbitration in Paris regarding a dispute arising from the termination of long-term contracts to purchase and ship iron ore.
  • A Canadian mining company in an ICC arbitration in London regarding a dispute over mining concession rights in Ghana.
  • A material witness in an LCIA arbitration in London concerning a dispute over ownership of a major Russian telecommunications company.
  • A Middle Eastern company in connection with claims concerning ownership and operation of an Iraqi telecommunications company.
  • A Middle Eastern consulting firm in a DIFC-LCIA arbitration in Dubai arising from telecommunications projects in Central Asia.
  • A multinational telecommunications corporate in a multibillion dollar UNCITRAL Rules investment treaty arbitration in the Hague against an African state.
  • A multinational telecommunications corporate in a $1.2 billion dollar ICC arbitration in Geneva concerning a shareholder dispute in relation to a telecommunications subsidiary.
  • A leading telecommunications company in an LCIA arbitration in London and related interim relief proceedings arising from a shareholder dispute.
  • A telecommunications corporate in an ICC arbitration in Paris alleging breach of shareholders agreement in respect of a North African joint venture.
  • A telecommunications joint venture in a $1 billion ICC arbitration in Stockholm arising out of an Eastern European privatization of telecommunications services.
  • A European contractor in an ICC arbitration with a state agency concerning the termination of an agreement to implement a digital terrestrial television network in an Eastern European country.
  • A Middle Eastern cable manufacturer in an ICC arbitration arising out of a contract for the expansion and modernization of the telecommunications system in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
  • A Middle East investment bank in related DIAC proceedings in Dubai arising from a property development project.
  • An international investment bank in related LCIA arbitrations in London arising from a joint venture project in the Ukraine.
  • A major European financial institution in an ICC arbitration arising out of the termination of services and technology agreements for the establishment of a structured derivatives business.
  • A UK financial institution in an LCIA arbitration concerning claims under political risk insurance coverage following civil unrest at a gold mine in the Solomon Islands.
  • A Czech subsidiary of a U.S. financial institution in an LCIA arbitration in London arising out of a business restructuring and privatization program implemented by a Czech government agency.
  • A major UK and Middle East financial institution in an LCIA arbitration in London arising out of currency trading transactions and services with a trading client in the United Arab Emirates.
  • A syndicate of investment banks in an LCIA arbitration in London involving political risk insurance claims for expropriation of energy receivables as a result of the damage to investment by Argentina’s enactment of the Emergency Law.
  • Two international banks in LCIA arbitration proceedings in London involving political risk insurance claims for expropriation of energy receivables as a result of Argentina’s Emergency Law.
  • A major insurer in several international arbitrations in the pharmaceutical and financial services sectors, including disputes in relation to product liability and securities claims valued at more than $1 billion.
  • A U.S. insurer in an ad hoc proceeding arising from the unwinding of a PA LMX spiral.
    A group of European insurers in an ad hoc arbitration with a U.S. state insurance department regarding claims related to pooled reinsurance participations.
  • A reinsurer in an LCIA arbitration relating to claims arising from financing of English football clubs.
  • An African state in a $100 million LCIA arbitration in London alleging breaches of a concession agreement for a port and terminal project.
  • A major U.S. multinational in an ICC arbitration in Amsterdam alleging liability for environmental clean-up at various manufacturing sites.
  • A Russian investor in a $60 million LCIA arbitration in London arising from an ownership dispute concerning a Moscow shopping complex.
  • A multibillion dollar fund manager in an ICC arbitration in London concerning a high-value shareholder dispute arising from a joint venture Turkish port development infrastructure project.
  • A U.S. software corporate in an ICC arbitration in London in relation to the termination of distribution agreements across the Middle East.
  • A global leader in technology and travel services in an ICC arbitration in Paris regarding a dispute arising from a long-term distribution agreement.
  • Floyd Landis in a CAS arbitration in Lausanne and New York arising out of the actions taken by the United States Anti-Doping Agency regarding Mr. Landis’s victory in the 2006 Tour de France competition.
  • A major Saudi Arabian publishing company in an ICC arbitration in London arising out of the termination of a contract with a UK publishing company for the adaptation and translation of school textbooks for use by the Saudi Ministry of Education.


Sixteen Partners Named Among the Lawdragon Global Litigation 500

-February 23, 2021

Who’s Who Legal 2021 Recognizes Gibson Dunn Partners in Arbitration, Tax and Competition

-January 14, 2021

Jeff Sullivan Appointed Queen’s Counsel

-December 17, 2020

Gibson Dunn Named International Arbitration Team of the Year at the British Legal Awards 2020

-November 24, 2020

Gibson Dunn Ranked in Chambers UK 2021

-October 23, 2020

The Singapore Convention on Mediation: New Kid on the Dispute Resolution Block Now in Force

-October 16, 2020

Law360 Names Eight Gibson Dunn Partners as 2020 MVPs

-October 5, 2020

Gibson Dunn Ranked in the 2021 UK Legal 500

-October 5, 2020

Benchmark Litigation Europe 2021 Names Four Partners Stars

-October 5, 2020

Thirteen Gibson Dunn Partners Recognized in Expert Guides’ Women in Business Law

-September 22, 2020

Gibson Dunn’s International Arbitration Practice Recognized in 2020 GAR 30

-July 10, 2020

Law360 Names Five Gibson Dunn Lawyers as 2020 Rising Stars

-July 6, 2020

Best Lawyers in France 2021 Recognizes 17 Gibson Dunn Attorneys

-June 25, 2020

Best Lawyers in the United Kingdom 2021 Recognizes 12 Gibson Dunn Attorneys

-June 12, 2020

Supreme Court Holds That The New York Convention Permits The Use Of Equitable Estoppel To Enforce An Arbitration Agreement Among Nonsignatories

-June 2, 2020

The Termination of Intra-EU Bilateral Investment Treaties and the Impact on Foreign Investment Protection in Europe

-May 13, 2020

Technology and Construction Court of England and Wales Holds That Experts Can Owe Clients a Fiduciary Duty of Loyalty

-April 30, 2020

Gibson Dunn Ranked in Legal 500 EMEA 2020

-April 30, 2020

California Supreme Court Confirms That the Hague Service Convention Does Not Preempt Right of Parties to Contract for Their Preferred Method of Service

-April 6, 2020

Online Dispute Resolution: An Option for Times of Crisis and Calm

-March 31, 2020

Ryan Whelan Named 2020 Legal Personality of the Year

-March 13, 2020

UK Supreme Court Paves the Way for Enforcement of an ICSID Award in the Long-Running <em>Micula v Romania</em> Dispute

-February 21, 2020

Law360 Names Gibson Dunn Among Its 2019 International Arbitration Practice Groups of the Year

-February 13, 2020

Coronavirus and Force Majeure: Addressing Epidemics in LNG and Other Commodities Contracts

-February 12, 2020

Who’s Who Legal Names 12 Partners to Practice Guides for Trade & Customs, Arbitration and Restructuring & Insolvency

-January 30, 2020

Gibson Dunn Named a 2019 Law Firm of the Year

-January 13, 2020

Gibson Dunn Case Named Among Top 5 International Arbitration Decisions of 2019

-December 23, 2019

Benchmark Litigation Europe 2020 Names Four Partners Stars

-November 4, 2019

Argentina and Other States Adopt Currency Restrictions, Raising Potential Investment Treaty Claims

-October 15, 2019

Gibson Dunn Ranked in Chambers UK 2020

-October 10, 2019

Gibson Dunn Ranked in the 2020 UK Legal 500

-October 4, 2019

UK Supreme Court Decides Suspending UK Parliament Was Unlawful

-September 24, 2019

Financial Times Recognizes Gibson Dunn at the European Innovative Lawyer Awards 2019

-September 16, 2019

The Singapore Convention on Mediation and the Path Ahead

-August 22, 2019

Getting the Deal Through: Appeals 2019

-August 13, 2019

New UK Prime Minister – what has happened?

-July 26, 2019

Digital Services Taxes May Violate Investment Treaty Protections

-July 24, 2019

Best Lawyers in the United Kingdom 2020 Recognizes 11 Gibson Dunn Partners

-July 1, 2019

Best Lawyers in Germany 2020 Recognizes 14 Gibson Dunn Attorneys

-July 1, 2019

Best Lawyers in France 2020 Recognizes 16 Gibson Dunn Attorneys

-July 1, 2019

UK Nationalisation – Investment Treaties can offer opportunities to reorganise now to protect valuations

-May 9, 2019

Gibson Dunn Recognized by Global Arbitration Review

-April 5, 2019

Gibson Dunn Ranked in the 2019 UK Legal 500

-November 21, 2018

Gibson Dunn Ranked in Chambers UK 2019

-November 2, 2018

Why We Think the UK Is Heading for a “Soft Brexit”

-October 10, 2018

Essar v. Norscot: Are The Costs Associated With Third Party Funding Recoverable?

-September 13, 2018

The Politics of Brexit for those Outside the UK

-July 12, 2018

Brexit – converting the political deal into a legal deal and the end state

-March 12, 2018

Intra-EU Investment Treaties: Is It Time to Restructure Your Investment?

-March 7, 2018

Brexit – Initial deal agreed

-December 8, 2017

The DIFC Court’s First Ever Judgment on State Immunity Is a Welcome Sign for Investors

-October 3, 2017

UK Seeks Dispute Resolution Options Outside The CJEU

-September 26, 2017

French Market Update – July 2017

-July 20, 2017

Managing Project Risk to Secure Profit

-July 6, 2017

What the UK Election Result Means for Brexit

-June 9, 2017

Webcast: Are We Speaking the Same Language? Privilege Issues in Cross-Border Litigation, Investigations and International Arbitration

-May 16, 2017

What the UK’s Snap General Election Means for Brexit

-April 21, 2017

2016 Year-End Transnational Litigation Update

-April 18, 2017

UK Government Triggers Article 50

-March 29, 2017

Analysis of March 6, 2017 Executive Order on Immigration

-March 7, 2017

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Issues Opinion Upholding Nationwide TRO of January 27 Immigration-Related Executive Order

-February 10, 2017

Recent Developments Regarding Executive Order on Immigration

-February 1, 2017

President Trump Issues Executive Order on Immigration

-January 30, 2017

UK Supreme Court Rules Parliament Must Hold Vote on Article 50

-January 24, 2017

Myanmar Arbitration: Progress Made and the Way Ahead

-January 1, 2017

UK High Court Rules That Parliament Must Vote on Triggering Article 50 Process for Brexit

-November 3, 2016

Brexit – UK Government Sets Out Process to Leave EU by 2019

-October 3, 2016

Resolving Commercial Disputes: The Way Forward for Myanmar

-August 26, 2016

BREXIT – What Next? Key issues if you are doing business in or with the UK and the EU

-June 28, 2016


-June 24, 2016

Covered Investment

-June 1, 2016

India – Legal and Regulatory Update

-May 18, 2016

DIFC Courts: A Gateway to Enforcing Foreign Judgments in Onshore Dubai

-March 14, 2016

The Government of India Amends the [Indian] Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996

-November 10, 2015

Investment Treaty Considerations For Deal Makers

-November 6, 2015

Webcast: Enforcing Arbitral Awards and Judgments Against Foreign Entities

-October 14, 2015

Bilateral and Multilateral Investments Treaties: What All Dealmakers Need to Know

-September 25, 2015

Investment Treaty Arbitration: Kenya

-March 1, 2015

Investment Treaty Arbitration: Philippines

-March 1, 2015

2014 Year-End Transnational Litigation Update

-February 27, 2015

Venezuela’s Currency Regulations May Violate Investment Treaty Protections

-February 25, 2015

Enforcing Arbitration Awards in California

-February 20, 2015

Webcast: Foreign Investments in Emerging Markets

-February 11, 2015

Webcast: Drafting Arbitration Clauses

-January 21, 2015

Protecting Your Investments in Emerging Markets

-October 6, 2014

The IBA Guidelines on Party Representation: An Important Step in Overcoming the Taboo of Ethics in International Arbitration

-April 1, 2014

Will Africa Be Lit By “BITs”?

-January 8, 2014

Limiting Investor Access to Investment Arbitration – A Solution without a Problem?

-January 1, 2014

Arbitration of Employment: Claims Challenges and Limits on Enforceability in Texas

-December 1, 2013

The Changed Landscape of Businesses’ Right to Enforce Arbitration Agreements: A Survey of Class Actions Involving Petitions to Compel Arbitration After Concepcion

-November 22, 2013

Antitrust Scrutiny of Pharmaceutical Product Hopping

-October 1, 2013

Indian Supreme Court Ruling Supports Foreign Arbitration Proceedings

-September 11, 2012

U.S. Supreme Court Finds That Class Action Waivers in Arbitration Agreements Are Enforceable Under the Federal Arbitration Act

-April 27, 2011

U.S. Supreme Court Limits Availability of Class Action Arbitration

-May 3, 2010

Can Professional Ethics Wait? The Need for Transparency in International Arbitration

-March 2, 2009

Choice Roles

-October 20, 2008

Recent Decisions Cast Substantial Doubt on Whether “Manifest Disregard of the Law” Constitutes a Valid Independent Ground for the Judicial Vacatur of Arbitration Awards under the United States Federal Arbitration Act

-October 7, 2008

English Court of Appeal: Client’s Right to Choose Its Legal Advisers Is Paramount

-July 30, 2008

An Injunction too Far: C v D

-March 7, 2008

U.S. Supreme Court Holds That the Federal Arbitration Act Supersedes State Laws Lodging Primary Jurisdiction in Another Forum

-February 27, 2008