Anti-suit injunctions are often issued by the courts of countries other than the place where the arbitration is held. However, in some cases, they emanate from the courts of the seat of the arbitration.
One can, of course, provide examples of either situation. However, the question arises as to whether this distinction involves genuine differences in the legal analysis of the problem created by anti-suit injunctions for international arbitration and its development.
We will first examine anti-suit injunctions issued at the seat of the arbitration.
A recent example of an anti-suit injunction issued at the seat of the arbitration is the decision of the Civil Court of Buenos Aires, on 27 September, 2004, in a dispute between the Construction Consortium ERIDAY and EBY, a bi-national entity created by the Republic of Argentina and the Republic of Paraguay.
ERIDAY had commenced arbitral proceedings against EBY under the ICC Rules of Arbitration, with the seat of the arbitration in Argentina. Once the terms of reference had been drawn up, EBY refused to sign, contesting both the manner in which the terms of reference had been drafted and their contents.