Arbitration is often used by parties in business relationships as a way to resolve commercial disputes. Advocates of arbitration argue that it has significant advantages over litigation in court, such as party control of the process, typically lower cost and shorter time to resolution, flexibility, privacy and the use of decision-makers who are selected by the parties on the basis of desired characteristics and experience. In contrast, critics of arbitration contend that arbitration is more expensive than litigation, offers no discovery or appellate rights and contains no option for summary judgment.
Currently, defendants Marathon Oil Corporation; Marathon E.G. LPG (MEGLP), a Cayman Islands subsidiary of Marathon; and Alba Equatorial Guinea Partnership (AEGP) are involved in a case in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, where they are seeking arbitration. They are trying to convince the judge to mandate arbitration in connection with a disagreement they are having with their limited partners pertaining to Marathon’s handling of hefty foreign income tax credits.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
