Committee publications
Artificial intelligence in regulatory and environmental law practice: beyond contract automation
Artificial intelligence is reshaping regulatory and environmental law practice far beyond contract automation, enabling real-time regulatory monitoring, satellite-based environmental enforcement and predictive compliance analytics. Legal practitioners who fail to engage with these tools risk not only operational inefficiency but also a fundamental misunderstanding of the new landscape in which their clients operate.
Released on Oct 6, 2026
Latin American Regional Forum – From the Editors – October 2026
A note from Mariano Batalla, Young Lawyers Initiatives Officer, IBA Latin American Regional Forum
Released on Oct 5, 2026
Conference report: Mergers and acquisitions in Latin America – building bridges through business: rethinking M&A in Latin America
A conference report about Mergers and acquisitions in Latin America – building bridges through business: rethinking M&A in Latin America, which took place from 23-25 March 2026.
Released on Oct 5, 2026
Voices from the field – Victoria Ting
This series asks the Anti-Corruption Committee’s officers the most significant anti-corruption risks and challenges that are currently affecting their region. This edition is with Victoria Ting, the Committee’s Regional Representative for the Asia Pacific, who discusses Singapore’s unique place as an international finance centre, its development of new technologies in combatting anti-corruption and how these interplay in an ‘arms race’ in AI.
Released on Oct 1, 2026
From the Editors: Litigation Committee newsletter – autumn 2026
Welcome to the Autumn 2026 edition of the IBA Litigation Committee Newsletter, entitled ‘What Moved the Needle? A Year of Litigation Developments around the World’.
Released on Oct 1, 2026
AI and the Spanish judiciary
The Spanish General Council of the Judiciary (the “Council”) issued Instruction 2/2026, dated 28 January 2026, which deals with the use of AI by the Spanish judges, setting out several principles which shall be observed, keeping effective human control. The Instruction 2/2026 also establishes certain limits and seeks public transparency.
Released on Oct 1, 2026
Annulment versus enforcement of arbitral awards in Nigeria: a narrower path for courts under the Arbitration and Mediation Act 2023
The Arbitration and Mediation Act (AMA) 2023 is a far-reaching measure that fundamentally improves Arbitration in Nigeria. One of the most notable changes in the AMA 2023 is its extensive and restrictive set of grounds for setting aside awards, which reduces courts’ interference in the arbitration process in Nigeria, while also liberalizing the approach to award recognition and enforcement of Awards. Furthermore, the new legislation introduces innovative measures, such as the creation of the Award Review Tribunal, as well as a wider range of interim protective measures to assist in the enforcement of awards. This paper explores the disparity between enforcement and annulment, vis-a-vis the recent trends in award enforcement under the AMA 2023 in Nigeria.
Released on Oct 1, 2026
Cyber fraud: a practical guide for asset recovery in Hong Kong
The financial infrastructure of Hong Kong, being a premier international banking hub, is frequently exploited by global fraudsters looking to deal with the illicit proceeds. The Hong Kong courts play a critical role in furthering international asset recovery. Time is of the essence when it comes to asset recovery in cyber fraud. Although a mere dispersal of the concerned assets or proceeds through Hong Kong does not necessarily render the recovery hopeless, it would aggravate the costs and efforts required for tracing and recovering them.
Released on Oct 1, 2026
Enforcement of foreign judgments: recent developments in the English courts
Recent decisions on the enforcement of foreign judgments and arbitral awards have emphasised the pro-enforcement stance of the English courts. However, it remains crucial for those seeking to enforce judgments in England to understand the key grounds for challenge. This article reviews recent key decisions and considers their practical and commercial significance for parties involved in enforcing international judgments and awards.
Released on Oct 1, 2026
Impact of exceptional circumstances on UAE construction contracts: the Strait of Hormuz context
The disruption of the Strait of Hormuz (SOH) has created significant legal and commercial challenges for businesses performing contracts connected with the region. Parties affected by these events may seek relief under the doctrines of force majeure or exceptional circumstances (hardship) under UAE law. This article examines the legal framework governing exceptional circumstances in general under Article 224 of the New UAE Civil Transactions Law (CTL) which came into force in June 2026, which replaced former Article 249 of the old Civil Code, and under the newly introduced Article 829(3) of the New CTL regarding hardship in construction contracts. Events occurring before the new CTL came into force remain governed by Article 249, while continuing events may be subject to both provisions depending on when they occurred.
Released on Oct 1, 2026
When companies can't sue but can still injunct: Hong Kong's tort of harassment ruling in comparative context
On 9 January 2026, in Sir Elly Kadoorie & Sons Ltd v Samantha Jane Bradley , the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal ("CFA") formally confirmed, for the first time at Hong Kong's highest Court, that the common law of Hong Kong recognises a tort of harassment, determines what its constituent elements are, whether a company may sue in harassment, and whether a corporate employer may nonetheless seek injunctive relief to restrain harassment directed at its employees.
Released on Oct 1, 2026
EU sanctions and the enforcement of Russian judgments and arbitral awards: the emerging European public policy approach
This article examines the growing intersection between EU sanctions on Russia and the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments and arbitral awards in European courts. Recent judicial developments across multiple Member States reveal an emerging consensus that compliance with EU restrictive measures constitutes a fundamental element of European public policy. The analysis centers on Advocate General Biondi’s February 2026 Opinion in Reibel v. Stankoimport (C-802/24), in which he proposed treating EU sanctions as part of European public policy. If the Court of Justice endorses this approach, Member State courts will be required – not merely permitted – to refuse enforcement where it would breach EU sanctions. The article reviews the relevant EU sanctions framework, particularly Article 11 of Regulation No. 833/2014, examines the enforcement paradox created by criminal liability provisions, and surveys the emerging judicial consensus across Italy, Germany, France and Sweden.
Released on Oct 1, 2026
From prompt to precedent: how a Mexican court turned ChatGPT into a judicial tool
In 2025, a Mexican federal appellate court used a standardized prompt and ChatGPT to calculate court-ordered security in an actual judicial proceeding. After applying the methodology in five cases, two binding precedents were published in January 2026: one establishing minimum requirements for the ethical and responsible use of artificial intelligence in judicial proceedings, and another validating its use to calculate security in amparo proceedings. The decisions matter not merely because a court used ChatGPT, but because they begin to define the conditions under which AI may become part of judicial methodology and the safeguards litigants may need when its output affects their procedural or financial position.
Released on Oct 1, 2026
No safe harbour: The growing power of US discovery in cross-border disputes
Section 1782 of the United States Judiciary Act has become one of the most powerful tools available to international litigants seeking evidence located in the United States. As cross-border disputes grow in volume and complexity, the statute’s utility has expanded commensurately. What began as a relatively obscure mechanism for cross-border judicial assistance has evolved into a critical component of cross-border litigation strategy.
Released on Oct 1, 2026
No shortcuts by default: what recent US crypto cases teach about jurisdiction, identity and non-participation
Over the past year, US courts have clarified how familiar procedural rules apply when digital assets, foreign actors and default intersect. Recent decisions concerning the situs of Ether (i.e. the location of a digital asset), abandonment of a jurisdictional challenge and a fraudster's misuse of a legitimate financial firm's identity carry a common message: non-participation does not cure defects in jurisdiction, service, attribution or proof. For cross-border litigators, the practical task is to build a record that will survive both default judgment and enforcement.
Released on Oct 1, 2026
Obtaining evidence in North Macedonia under the Hague Evidence Convention: practical guidance on Chapter II commissions and the new civil procedure framework
This article provides practical guidance on the use of the Hague Evidence Convention for cross-border evidence gathering in North Macedonia. Based on experience with Convention commissions in foreign proceedings, this article describes the Chapter II framework, which permits a duly appointed Commissioner to take voluntary witness testimony without compulsion. The article sets out the practical steps for obtaining such testimony by video link, including the role of the Ministry of Justice as the competent authority, the permission requirements under Articles 17 and 21 of the Convention, and the conditions that Commissioners must observe. The 2020 Guide to Good Practice issued by the Hague Conference expressly contemplates video-link evidence-taking under Chapter II and informs the procedural approach outlined here.
Released on Oct 1, 2026
South Africa's Supreme Court of Appeal clarifies challenges to international arbitral awards
In Kingdom of Lesotho v Frazer Solar GmbH and Others, South Africa's Supreme Court of Appeal delivered a split decision on setting aside an international arbitral award and rescinding an enforcement order. A six-judge majority rescinded the enforcement order, but a five-judge majority refused to set aside the award because the application was brought outside the three-month period in article 34(3) of the UNCITRAL Model Law. The decision confirms strict time limits while preserving a separate route to resist recognition or enforcement under article 36.
Released on Oct 1, 2026
Separate questions, separate standards: sovereign disputes in US courts after Devas, Blasket and YPF
Over the past twelve months, three developments have refined how parties litigate against foreign states in United States courts. The Supreme Court confirmed that personal jurisdiction over a sovereign turns on the FSIA’s immunity exceptions and proper service, with no separate ‘minimum contacts’ requirement (CC/Devas v Antrix). It then declined, against the partial urging of the US government, to disturb the DC Circuit’s holding that an arbitration agreement’s existence is distinct from its scope, leaving intra-EU objections for the arbitrators (Kingdom of Spain v Blasket). And the Second Circuit set aside the US$16.1bn YPF judgment against Argentina, believed to be the largest ever entered against a sovereign, on the merits of Argentine law reviewed de novo (Petersen v Argentine Republic). Across all three, US courts are treating jurisdiction, arbitrability and the merits as distinct inquiries, each governed by its own standard of review, and they decline to collapse them into a single contest over sovereign liability. The practical lesson for practitioners on both sides of sovereign disputes in the United States is that prevailing at one stage secures little at the next.
Released on Oct 1, 2026
Service of foreign judicial documents in civil and commercial matters is made easier in Ukraine
Digitalisation of Ukraine’s civil justice system is reshaping an area that has traditionally seen little procedural change: execution of foreign requests for service of judicial documents in civil and commercial matters
Released on Oct 1, 2026
The evolution of admissibility of digital evidence in India
Transition from paper trails to digital footprints has transformed the proving of facts in courts. E-mails, messaging app logs, CCTV archives, server logs, etc., routinely feature in civil and criminal litigations. The repealed Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (“IEA”) adapted to this reality through sections 65A-65B, primarily, drafted for an era of standalone computers, optical or magnetic media. Similarly, the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (“BSA”) seeks to consolidate and modernise evidentiary rules, including dealing with electronic and digital records. This article examines three issues: (i) whether the BSA modernises admissibility or substantially replicates Section 65B of the IEA; (ii) whether BSA is technology-neutral to accommodate evolving platforms such as Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) systems and synthetic media, and (iii) whether BSA provides adequate safeguards against deepfakes, data manipulation, and opaque AI outputs.
Released on Oct 1, 2026
US FTC v Ukrainian IT: Cross-border service of US court documents and enforceability in Ukraine
In June 2026, the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) brought proceedings against Genesis Tech , probably, the largest Ukrainian IT Group. For Ukraine's IT sector, and not only Ukraine's, it is the case that will be shaping market practices. it also shows how quickly US proceedings concerning digital businesses can acquire a cross-border dimension. That cross-border dimension is not limited to the merits of the FTC's allegations. This raises a separate and practical question for companies and individuals: when a US court grants urgent relief, what amounts to proper service in a foreign jurisdiction, and can that order actually be recognised and enforced there?
Released on Oct 1, 2026
Ghana's High Court reasserts the limits of arbitral autonomy: lessons from the Boankra Inland Logistics Terminal dispute
Arbitration has long been promoted in Ghana and the world at large as an efficient and final mechanism for resolving commercial disputes, with judicial intervention intended to remain exceptional. However, the decision of the High Court of Ghana in Justmoh Construction Limited v. Ashanti Port Services Limited (May 2026), setting aside a US$33.3 million arbitral award arising from the Boankra Inland Logistics Terminal project, serves as a significant reminder that arbitral autonomy is neither absolute nor immune from judicial scrutiny. The Court identified three fundamental defects: the claimant's lack of corporate capacity to commence arbitration, the improper constitution of its board of directors, and its failure to comply with mandatory contractual pre-arbitration dispute resolution procedures. This article considers the significance of the decision for commercial litigation and arbitration in Ghana and examines its implications for parties engaged in cross-border disputes.
Released on Oct 1, 2026
When sanctions freeze the contract: Lithuanian courts on non-performance, damages and the limits of civil liability under EU restrictive measures
Over the past twelve months, Lithuanian courts have produced a settled line of authority on a question with obvious cross-border resonance: who bears the losses when EU sanctions make contractual performance unlawful? Building on a June 2024 Supreme Court ruling that asset-freezing measures render pre-existing contracts non-performable for as long as the measures apply, the Lithuanian Court of Appeal in March 2025 dismissed damages claims of approximately EUR 8 million and EUR 6 million brought against an electricity supplier that had been identified as controlled by a designated person. The courts held that suspending or terminating the affected contracts was the only lawful course of action, so no unlawful act – and hence no civil liability – could arise from sanctions-driven non-performance. The Supreme Court has since declined to reopen these rulings and saw no need for a preliminary reference to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). For businesses transacting in or through the Baltic region, the message is that sanctions risk is, in effect, allocated to whichever party it happens to fall on.
Released on Oct 1, 2026
The International Bar Association and JuraLaw International™ Co-Publish Law, Ethics, and Armed Conflict: An International Law Reader
The International Bar Association and JuraLaw International™ are proud to announce the co-publication of Law, Ethics, and Armed Conflict: An International Law Reader, to which members of the IBA Human Rights Law Committee have contributed.
Released on Oct 1, 2026
Mining Law Committee – From the Editors – October 2026
A note from the Newsletter Editors of the IBA Mining Law Committee, Virginia Schweitzer and Xiaofeng Cheng.
Released on Sep 28, 2026
The Los Bronces–Andina Alliance: a unique mining joint venture in Chile
In 2025, Anglo American and Codelco announced the Bronces–Andina alliance, a first-of-its-kind partnership which fully integrates two major copper mines – owned by different companies – into a single coordinated operation without merging their ownership. This innovative structure allows Anglo American’s Los Bronces mine and Codelco’s Andina mine to be run under one unified mine plan, unlocking significant extra value and production that neither could achieve alone.
Released on Sep 28, 2026
Mapping energy transition minerals permitting initiatives: a research project funded by the IBA Special Projects Fund
The accelerating demand for energy transition minerals has prompted a new wave of permitting-related reforms in a range of mining jurisdictions. Governments are increasingly treating mineral development as a strategic priority for industrial policy, energy security and supply-chain resilience, and are redesigning legal and administrative frameworks accordingly. A set of these reforms are often described in general terms as ‘streamlining’ or ‘fast-tracking’, but there has so far been no systematic legal analysis of how they are designed, how they operate, and how they differ.
Released on Sep 28, 2026
Algeria’s new mining law: between liberalisation and sovereignty
After more than a decade under Law No.14-05 of 24 February 2014 (Law 14-05), Algeria has reshaped its mining regime with the adoption of Law No. 25-12 of 3 August 2025 (the New Mining Law), published in the Official Gazette, No. 52 on 7 August 2025.
Released on Sep 28, 2026
Critical minerals and global governance
Critical minerals are essential to advanced industries such as electronics, defence, and renewable energy, yet growing demand has intensified concerns over supply risks, geopolitical tensions, and environmental impacts. The Covid-19 pandemic exposed structural vulnerabilities in global supply chains, reinforcing the urgency of securing stable and sustainable access to these resources.
Released on Sep 28, 2026
Meet the officer
Eduardo C Botello Adame is the Managing Partner of Santos Elizondo, a full-service firm based in Monterrey, Mexico. He joined the firm in 2005, became a partner in 2016 and has led it since 2023. Nicole Phillis, the North American Regional Forum’s Publications Officer, sat down with him for a conversation about running a law firm, why the IBA is worth the flights and what he does when he is not doing any of that
Released on Sep 21, 2026