In <span class="news-text_italic-underline">TikTok Inc v Rosendin Electric Inc [2026] IEHC 555</span>, the Irish High Court gave effect to a request for judicial assistance from an arbitrator conducting a commercial arbitration in San Francisco. The dispute concerned allegedly defective work under a Master Services Agreement for the fit-out of data centre facilities.
The arbitrator requested the deposition testimony of a US citizen living in Dublin who was a founder of a subcontractor involved in the works. TikTok applied to the court without notice, with the arbitrator’s authorisation and Rosendin’s consent.
Barniville P held that the court had jurisdiction under article 27 of the UNCITRAL Model Law, section 15 of the Irish Arbitration Act 2010 and the Rules of the Superior Courts. He confirmed that article 27 extends to arbitrations taking place outside Ireland. With no directly applicable authority, the court applied by analogy the four conditions identified in <span class="news-text_italic-underline">Cornec v Morrice [2012] 1 IR 804</span>: relevance, absence of oppression, protection of privilege and admissibility. It found that each condition was satisfied.
The court ordered the witness to attend an examination on oath, either in person at a named Dublin law firm or remotely. Its orders also permitted cross-examination and provided for confidentiality.
The decision illustrates how an Irish court can assist a foreign arbitral tribunal in obtaining evidence from a non-party witness resident in Ireland. It also offers a practical framework for similar applications.
<span class="news-text_medium">Case:</span> <span class="news-text_italic-underline">TikTok Inc v Rosendin Electric Inc [2026] IEHC 555</span>, 8 July 2026 (Barniville P).
