TECHNOLOGY DISPUTES
CD: How are companies navigating the enforcement of technology-related judgments across multiple jurisdictions? What strategies are proving most effective in mitigating conflicts between differing legal frameworks?
Quartermain: Technology contracts are often multijurisdictional. Companies are increasingly attempting to mitigate conflicts between differing legal frameworks and address enforcement issues at the drafting stage. This is being done through no longer treating the dispute resolution provisions of a contract as ‘boilerplate’. Parties are purporting to agree robust dispute resolution provisions, increasingly looking to build in an expert determination step for certain issues where appropriate, or otherwise taking care to ensure that arbitration agreements agreed are valid and fit for purpose.
Vakil: Silicon Valley builds technologies that now run on a global stage, from social media and semiconductors to autonomous vehicles. Technology ignores borders, and so do the disputes that follow. High stakes intellectual property (IP) and contract battles almost never stay inside a single country, and the companies that win are the ones that treat cross-border enforcement and litigation as a single, integrated strategy. There are three core principles that drive strategy. First, design your jurisdictional architecture. Sophisticated companies intentionally place IP, affiliates and key contracts in selected jurisdictions to preserve options to sue, defend and collect meaningful remedies in multiple forums. Second, map your business to your rivals. Know where competitors sell, manufacture, hire talent and raise capital, then align your filings and enforcement so you can bring pressure in the markets and courts that matter most to them. Third, run a coordinated global defence. Parallel proceedings are now standard in major tech disputes, so you need consistent positions, evidence and messaging across all cases to avoid self-inflicted conflicts and to maximise leverage on a global level.
Apr-Jun 2026 issue
Norton Rose Fulbright LLP
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP and Affiliates