Dr Hamish Lal has been consistently ranked Band 1 in Construction, and Band 1 in International Construction Arbitration in Chambers & Partners UK, and in the Top-Tier in The Legal 500 UK. Hamish is a Solicitor-Advocate (All Higher Courts) and admitted to Part II of the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) Courts Register of Legal Practitioners. He is a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (FCIArb) and a Fellow of the Institution of Civil Engineers (FICE). He has been simultaneously Chairman of The Society of Construction Law and The Adjudication Society. He is the General Editor of the Construction Law Journal published by Sweet & Maxwell, Adjunct Professor at University College Dublin, and Chairman of the Oriel Law Society.
Hamish is a recognised legal authority on international construction arbitration and is held in high regard by clients, peers, tribunals, expert witnesses, and fellow Arbitrators. He has acted under the rules of the International Court of Arbitration (ICC); London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA); Dubai International Arbitration Centre (DIAC); Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (SCC); and the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC), as well as in the Technology and Construction Court (TCC); DIFC Courts; the Qatar Financial Centre (QFC) Courts; Mediation; Expert Determination; Statutory Adjudication and in Dispute Adjudication Boards (DABs).
Hamish’s practice covers the full spectrum of issues that can arise on international construction and energy projects, including prospective and retrospective delay analysis; disruption; cumulative impact claims; front-end engineering design (FEED) errors; non-conformance reports; design codes (e.g. DNV-OS-J101); pipeline weld defects; bad-weather windows; vessel-standby; unforeseen ground conditions; professional negligence; taking over / completion; liquidated damages; incentive payments; variations; bond calls (e.g. based on URDG758); international sampling methods; termination (under various forms of contracts under International Federation of Consulting Engineers, FIDIC, CRINE/LOGIC and NEC3/4); joint-venture; consortium and project finance disputes.
Hamish has published widely, including books, Managing & Quantifying Disruption Claims published by Thomas Telford and Manual of Construction Agreements published by LexisNexis. His Papers include Multiplicity in International Arbitration – Procedural Solutions in Matthias Scherer and Catherine A. Kunz (eds), ASA Bulletin, Volume 43, Issue 4 (2025); Security for Costs in International Construction Arbitration in Matthias Scherer and Catherine A. Kunz (ed), ASA Bulletin, Volume 42, Issue 4 (2024); and A Spectrum of Dispute Resolution Choices: What does Strategic Thinking Inform, Keynote Paper at Ho Chi Minh City International Construction Arbitration Conference 2025. Hamish started as a trainee-solicitor at Freshfields and was a Partner at US Firms, Jones Day and then Akin Gump LLP before joining Hamish Lal Partners.
The US Supreme Court has been asked to clarify the legal regime governing non-signatories to arbitration agreements under the Federal Arbitration Act. In particular, the Court is now asked to resolve whether state law principles of equitable estoppel apply to a claim to extend an arbitration agreement, or whether “federal common law” derived from a […]
Apportionment of liability amongst participants in an unincorporated joint venture is complex. Such complexity is increased when one participant is in dispute with the joint venture and the absence of arbitration joinder means that there are two arbitrations. This gives rise to questions of the boundary of jurisdiction of each Tribunal and to questions about […]
Arbitral awards are rarely set aside. In DWL v DWM,[1] the Singapore High Court dismissed an application to set-aside an arbitral award for excess of jurisdiction or breach of natural justice. Eminent judges have been clear “there is a difference between, on the one hand, a party having no opportunity to address a point or […]
In JKD and anor v IKC,[1] the English High Court dismissed a challenge under section 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996 to an arbitral Order refusing to restrain a call on a bond. This is another important case because it reinforces the thinking that section 68 challenges apply only to Awards (not arbitral Orders) and […]
In DSS v DST,[1] the Singapore High Court found that an award, where 108 out of the 211 paragraphs were wholesale or substantial reproductions of excerpts from a related award, was not rendered in breach of natural justice. The Claimant said that the reproductions were not limited to reciting of uncontroversial procedural matters but “extend […]
In TTSJV W.L.L and others v BapCo Refining B.S.C (TTSJV),[1] the English High Court dismissed an application for an injunction against a bond call. Applications to restrain bond calls are difficult, given the high threshold. London has reaffirmed the position that a call on an ‘on-demand’ bond can only be restrained in cases of fraud […]
We use cookies to improve your experience on our site. By using our site, you consent to cookies.
Manage your cookie preferences below:
Essential cookies enable basic functions and are necessary for the proper function of the website.
Statistics cookies collect information anonymously. This information helps us understand how visitors use our website.
Google Analytics is a powerful tool that tracks and analyzes website traffic for informed marketing decisions.
Service URL: policies.google.com (opens in a new window)
You can find more information in our Privacy and .