Life Sciences Law Forum 2016: The practicalities of litigating disputes

The practicalities of litigating disputes were discussed yesterday in the session “Collaboration agreements – What are the best jurisdictions to resolve disputes” at the Life Sciences Law Forum 2016 in London.

The session covered the pros and cons of various choices “when choosing a governing law”.

“Consider the depth of experience of the local law firms in the relevant specialism, and English language skills,” said Suzanne Smith, who was one of the two speakers at the session.

Laws which were discussed in the session were English, Swiss, Swedish, US, Delaware New York and Californian.

It was stressed in the session that there are different strengths and weaknesses to choosing different governing laws and a few examples were given: “The English law is suited to complex contractual disputes, but generally not popular with partners from civil law countries,” said Smith

She gave another example: “If choosing Californian law, one has to consider the time difference.”

It was further discussed in the session what a company should consider when assessing jurisdiction and arbitration in disputes.

Points which were raised regarding arbitration were, for example, that the case can be heard in English and that the process is quick and independent, as opposed to picking a foreign jurisdiction, which could cause the burden of litigating in a different language.

“The translation costs of litigating abroad can be high,” Smith said, adding: “Arbitration in English can save on translation costs.”