One dispute. Different legal lenses.

Different traditions. One arbitration.

The lawyers, the contract and the enforcement court may each come from a different legal setting.

• Common law: Judicial decisions are an important source of law, alongside legislation. England and Wales is one example.
• Civil law: Legislation and codes occupy a central place. France is one example; courts and case law still matter.
• Sharia-informed systems: Islamic legal principles interact with national legislation and institutions in different ways. Saudi Arabia is one example.

These are broad traditions, not fixed rulebooks. Systems overlap, and the law of the particular jurisdiction matters. Examples are illustrative, not universal descriptions. Sources: [1], [2], [3].

One case. Several laws.

A seat in one country does not mean every question is decided under that country’s law.

• Contract law: Which law governs the parties’ rights and remedies?
• Arbitration agreement: Which law governs consent to arbitrate? It may need separate analysis.
• Seat and procedure: Which legal system supervises the arbitration? What rules govern the process?
• Enforcement: Where are assets located, and what rules will the enforcing court apply?

The agreement law is a distinct question. Sources: [1], Articles 19, 20, 28 and 34; [4], Article V.

A working example: follow the dispute

Imagine a cross-border supply contract. Its terms set out a deliberate mix:

• Contract: English law governs contract rights and remedies.
• Seat: Paris, France — French arbitration law and supervisory courts.
• Rules: ICC Rules — the agreed framework for the proceedings.
• Assets: Saudi Arabia — enforcement may be sought there.

The hearing can take place elsewhere. The seat is a legal home, not necessarily the hearing venue.

This is an illustration only. Sources: [1], Articles 19–20 and 28; [4], Article V; [5], Articles 25 and 38.

Contract interpretation: same facts, different questions

A supplier says it had a contractual right to end a long-term agreement. The buyer says the supplier acted unfairly.

France: Article 1104 of the Civil Code requires contracts to be negotiated, formed and performed in good faith. The provision is mandatory.

England and Wales: English law has no general principle of good faith in contracting. A duty can still arise from the contract or the legal context.

Why it matters: The applicable law can change the legal route a party uses to challenge the same conduct. The outcome still depends on the facts and the contract.

The example is hypothetical. Sources: [2], Article 1104; [3], paragraphs 27–28.

Documents: who has to hand over what?

In a dispute about delays, one party wants internal project emails held by the other.

The expectations: Lawyers may arrive with different expectations about disclosure, shaped by their legal training and experience.

The practical question: If the IBA Evidence Rules apply, a request must identify a document or narrow category and explain its relevance and materiality. Objections can be considered.

Neither broad court-style discovery nor zero disclosure is automatic. The agreement, rules, tribunal’s directions and applicable law matter.

The IBA Rules apply or guide only where adopted or used. Sources: [6], Articles 1, 3 and 9; [7].

The hearing: who asks the questions?

The way evidence is presented can feel familiar to one legal team and unfamiliar to another.

• Witnesses: Will witnesses give written statements? Who questions them, and how much time will each side have?
• Experts: Will each party appoint an expert, or will the tribunal appoint its own? The process can use either approach or both.
• Privilege: A document confidential in one sense is not automatically protected from production. Identify the applicable privilege rules early.

Agree the procedure early. National court habits do not automatically govern an international hearing. Sources: [1], Articles 18–19; [6], Articles 4–6 and 8–9; [7].

Sharia and national law: look at the actual jurisdiction

Sharia-informed law is not a single international arbitration code. National laws and their application vary.

Saudi Arabia as an example: Saudi Arabia’s Arbitration Law allows parties to agree procedural rules, subject to Sharia. It also directs tribunals to apply the parties’ chosen substantive rules subject to Sharia and Saudi public policy.

Practical consequence: Where Saudi law applies or enforcement is anticipated there, consider the contract’s payment terms and the remedies sought with local advice. The relevant rule and result depend on the facts and legal framework.

Saudi Arabia is one example, not a proxy for every jurisdiction. Source: [5], Articles 2, 25 and 38.

After the award: winning is not the last step

An award may need to be recognised and enforced where the other party has assets.

At the seat: A court at the seat may hear a setting-aside challenge under its arbitration law. That is a different stage from enforcement abroad.

Where enforcement is sought: Where the New York Convention applies, Article V provides limited grounds on which recognition or enforcement may be refused, including public policy.

A difference between legal systems does not, by itself, make an award unenforceable. The relevant court applies its own legal framework to the award before it.

Treaty application and local law matter. Sources: [1], Articles 34–36; [4], Article V(2)(b).

The checklist: questions worth asking early

The best time to spot a mismatch is before it becomes a procedural fight.

1. Which law governs the contract? Check the clause, mandatory rules and any local law that may still matter.
2. What is the seat? Identify the supervisory courts and the law that governs the arbitration.
3. What procedure is expected? Discuss documents, witnesses, experts, privilege and language.
4. Where might the award be enforced? Consider likely assets, the award’s remedies and local enforcement rules.
5. What law governs the arbitration agreement? Consider an express choice and the applicable conflict-of-laws rules.

Questions depend on the circumstances of each case. Sources: [1], [4], [5], [6].

Educational overview; legal outcomes depend on the applicable law and facts.