Search

The article discusses a case in which the Second Circuit determined that it had jurisdiction to reverse a district court decision declining to enjoin an arbitration. The dispute was between The Resource Group International Limited (TRGI), a Bermuda corporation, and its former chairman, concerning certain investments. The Second Circuit found that it had jurisdiction based on a forum selection clause in amendments to the governing agreement, which referenced New York state law. The court remanded the case back to the district court to determine the scope of the subsequent agreement and consider which claims were arbitrable. [Extracted from the article]

In a recent decision, the Second Circuit ruled that a lawsuit brought by former employees of Four Seasons Hotels and Resorts regarding a COVID-related furlough was not subject to arbitration. The employees claimed that the hotel violated the federal Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act and its state counterpart when they were indefinitely furloughed at the start of the pandemic. The court found that the terms of the employment agreements did not extend arbitration to permanent layoffs, and specifically excluded disputes regarding permanent layoffs from arbitration. This decision highlights the importance of clear and specific language in arbitration agreements. [Extracted from the article]

The article focuses on how Ukrainian investors are utilizing bilateral investment treaties (BITs) to address Russia's unlawful annexation of regions in eastern and southern Ukraine, drawing parallels with past actions in Crimea. It explores the legal avenues available to investors for seeking compensation through international arbitration, highlighting the significance of effective control over disputed territories in determining Russia's obligations under BITs.

This article discusses strategies and challenges in navigating a timed arbitration. The author shares their experience as plaintiff's counsel in a trade secrets case that was set for a jury trial but later agreed to be submitted to a single arbitrator. The parties agreed on various rules, including time limits for opening statements and witness examinations, as well as the use of witness statements instead of live testimony. The article emphasizes the importance of staying flexible and considering alternative dispute resolution to meet client goals. It also provides tips on using opening statements effectively, submitting authentic witness statements, helping expert witnesses understand their role, researching the arbitrator's prior cases, and using the post-hearing brief to tie all the evidence together. [Extracted from the article]

The article titled "The Lawyer As Mediator and Arbitrator... Featuring Ryan Abbott" is part of a series that aims to highlight the diverse roles lawyers can hold. The article focuses on Ryan Abbott, a mediator and arbitrator, and provides insights into his role and the field of alternative dispute resolution (ADR). Abbott explains that as a neutral, he helps parties resolve disputes through mediation or arbitration, which are often simpler, faster, cheaper, and more private than traditional litigation. The article also discusses the history of mediation and arbitration, the ease of entry into the field, the workload and pay scale, and offers advice for those interested in pursuing a career in ADR. [Extracted from the article]

This article discusses the issue of anti-arbitration injunctions in international commercial arbitration. It explains that anti-arbitration injunctions are legal measures used to prevent parties from commencing or continuing arbitration proceedings. The article focuses on the recent ruling by the Bombay High Court in India, which restrained the enforcement of an anti-enforcement injunction granted by the Singapore High Court. The court found that the dispute in question was non-arbitrable under Indian law and that the arbitration proceedings would violate public policy. The article also explores the position of UK and US courts on anti-arbitration injunctions and discusses the implications of the Bombay High Court's ruling in the Indian legal landscape. The authors express their belief that the case will be appealed and that appellate courts will provide further clarity on the issue. [Extracted from the article]

The Supreme Court of the United States has agreed to hear an appeal from a cryptocurrency exchange regarding the enforceability of an arbitration clause in its user agreements. The case, Suski v. Coinbase, Inc., involves a dispute over whether a forum selection clause in the "Official Rules" of a sweepstakes sponsored by the exchange supersedes the arbitration clause in the user agreement. The Ninth Circuit affirmed a lower court's decision to deny the defendant's motion to compel arbitration, finding that the forum selection clause took precedence. The Supreme Court had previously ruled in favor of the defendant in a related case, holding that the defendant should not have had to face discovery while its appeal on the denial of its arbitration motion was pending. [Extracted from the article]

Returning to In-Person Arbitration Conferences with Virtual/Hybrid Options As the pandemic recedes, we expect to see increased attendance at in-person networking events and travel to major arbitration conferences. • The new International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) Arbitration Rules, in force as of July 1, 2022, also have implications for greener arbitrations. • The updated Article 26.1 of the 2021 International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) Arbitration Rules expressly provides that the tribunal may decide that a hearing will be conducted remotely. [Extracted from the article]

The American Arbitration Association and International Centre for Dispute Resolution (AAAICDR) have updated their Mass Arbitration Supplementary Rules. The new rules include changes to the fee schedule, with a flat initiation fee for employment mass arbitrations. The costs of Merits Arbitrators are now shared by both parties, and the company is responsible for paying the compensation for the arbitrators and mediators. The powers of the Process Arbitrator have also been expanded, allowing them to make decisions on various aspects of the arbitration process. Additionally, there are new filing requirements that require representatives to certify the truthfulness of their filings. Advocates preparing for mass arbitration actions should be aware of these changes and consider the implications they may have on their strategies. [Extracted from the article]

Dean John Smagula 215-204-1448 intllaw@temple.edu law.temple.edu/llm Villanova University 1 year FT, up to 5 years PT $1,020/credit (24 credits required) Application deadlines: Fall: July 31; Spring: Nov. 30; Summer: April 1 Contact: Asst. Student Lawyer obtained the information for this directory by soliciting ABA-accredited law schools, which were offered free listings of their ABA-acquiesced LL.M. programs for graduates of U.S. law schools. [Extracted from the article]

The article focuses on the key differences between domestic U.S. arbitration and international arbitration, highlighting how U.S. litigators might misjudge international arbitration by treating it as a mere extension of domestic procedures. It outlines seven crucial distinctions that can impact the effectiveness of legal representation in international cases, including jurisdictional issues, arbitrator selection, disclosure practices, award enforcement, and tactical considerations.

Over two years ago, in June of 2020, the United States Supreme Court determined in GE Energy Power Conversion France SAS, Corp. v. Outokumpu Stainless USA, LLC, No. 18-1048, WL 2814297 (June 1, 2020), that in certain circumstances, even nonsignatories to an agreement could compel arbitration of international disputes. July 8, 2022), on remand, the Eleventh Circuit found in favor of GEP, holding that although GEP was not a signatory to the Agreements, because it was a defined party, it was covered by the governing arbitration clause. [Extracted from the article]

September 2, 2022 Can parties to a private, commercial international arbitration use the federal courts to compel a person in the United States to provide testimony or produce documents? As a result, parties to international arbitrations could, in some circumstances, get more discovery through the U.S. court system than parties in domestic (U.S.) arbitration. [Extracted from the article]

Arbitration provides an opportunity for parties to resolve dis-putes privately and more quickly than traditional litigation. Specifically, the concern is that the arbitrator or arbitra-tion organization will feel the need to keep the entity happy to ensure the continued receipt of its arbitration business, and the way to ensure that is by ruling in favor of said entity in arbitra-tion matters. [Extracted from the article]

However, in its decision the Court did not detail whether arbitral tribunals constituted under the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States (ICSID tribunals) qualified as "foreign or international tribunals" under Section 1782. In some recent decisions flowing from the Eastern and Southern Districts of New York, federal courts have further limited the use of Section 1782, finding that ICSID tribunals that were established to resolve investor-state arbitrations did not qualify as "foreign or international tribunals" under Section1782. These decisions have turned on a finding that there was no material difference between ICSID tribunals and the arbitration tribunal that had been the subject of the ZF Automotive decision and which had been convened in accordance with the UNCITRAL Rules. [Extracted from the article]

In 2015, Lucy Greenwood, Michael Mcilwrath and Ema Vidak-Gojkovic coauthored Puppies or Kittens? Mike: I agree with Lucy that for the foreseeable future, climate change will continue to be a prime driver of large, international arbitrations between major players in infrastructure and energy. The article focuses on a critical benefit of arbitration-procedural flexibility-and how the absence of information about how arbitrators handle scheduling and related issues impairs arbitrator selection. Lucy: To a certain extent we wanted to remove some of the guesswork from arbitrator selection and at the very least start an open dialogue about the lack of transparency in arbitrator selection. [Extracted from the article]

In ZF Automotive U.S., Inc. v. Luxshare, Inc., the respondent intends to bring a private arbitration in Germany over alleged fraud during a sale of part of ZF’s company. The district court located within the Sixth Circuit ordered discovery under a 1964 statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1782, and its 2019 opinion in Abdul Latif Jameel Transportation Co. v. Fed. Ex. Corp. (In Re Application to Obtain Discovery for Use in Foreign Proceedings), 939 F.3d 710. Section 1782 authorizes a court to order discovery in a proceeding before a foreign tribunal. Exactly what a foreign tribunal is, is the crux of this matter. The Supreme Court stayed discovery in ZF, granted a petition for certiorari prior to Sixth Circuit adjudication, and consolidated the case with AlixPartners, LLP v. Fund for Protection of Investors’ Rights in Foreign States, No. 21-518, which addresses a private arbitration pursuant to an international treaty. There is a split in the circuits on this statute. The Fourth and Sixth Circuits have held that the statute encompasses private commercial arbitral tribunals, but the Second, Fifth, and Seventh Circuits have held that it does not. The Supreme Court in 2021 granted certiorari in Servotronics Inc. v. Rolls-Royce PLC, which would have addressed the split, but it was dismissed before oral argument. The last Supreme Court ruling on this statute was Intel Corp. v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., 542 U.S. 14 (2004), which allowed discovery for a proceeding before an agency of the European Union. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

However, the Second Circuit agreed with the Plaintiff that the district court erred in using the "extraordinary circumstances" to reduce the attachment all the way to $3 million. Finally, the Second Circuit also found that the district court erred in finding that the plaintiff was unlikely to succeed on the full amount of its claimed damages. The Second Circuit has addressed two issues previously left open in a prior decision in a recent case Iraq Telecom Limited v. IBL Bank S.A.L., holding that courts addressing attachments under New York law may consider both statutory and non-statutory factors in deciding whether to attach a party's assets, or vacate or modify an existing attachment-but non-statutory factors can only be considered if they are determined to be "extraordinary.". [Extracted from the article]

This case1, heard before the U.S. District Court for theDistrict of Columbia ("the court"), concerns theenforcement of an arbitral award against the Republic ofDjibouti in favor of Doraleh Container Terminal SA("DCT"), arising out of a dispute over the developmentand operation of a port. Djibouti sought to vacate the award, arguing that (i)the tribunal exceeded its authority (ii) the tribunalviolated Djibouti's due process rights and (iii) the awardwould be contrary to U.S. public policy if enforced. [Extracted from the article]

Previous examples include the nonprofit Arbitral Women formed in 2005 and dedicated to advancing the interests of female practitioners and arbitrators in the international arbitration community; the Equal Representation in Arbitration Pledge (ERA) launched in 2015 to narrow the gap between male and female arbitrators sitting in international arbitration proceedings; and Racial Equality for Arbitration Law (REAL), started in January 2021, aimed to increase both opportunities for underrepresented groups and racial and ethnic diversity in international arbitration. Emergency arbitration procedures allow parties to seek such relief from an arbitrator on an emergency basis before the tribunal has been constituted. In this issue, we focus on international arbitration. [Extracted from the article]

Of those, 85 were filed under the ICDR International Arbitration Rules, 32 were filed under the AAA Commercial Arbitration Rules, and 2 were filed under the ICDR Canadian Arbitration Rules. In 2006, the International Centre for Dispute Resolution (ICDR) was the first arbitral institution to introduce emergency arbitration provisions in its rules. As the international division of the American Arbitration Association (AAA), the ICDR also handles emergency arbitrations under other sets of rules issued by the AAA. [Extracted from the article]

Readers are encouraged to consult the report for a detailed analysis of procedural and substantive issues that may arise in ICC emergency arbitrator proceedings, including reference to ICC practice guides and case management techniques for efficient emergency arbitrator proceedings. See ICC, ICC Unveils Preliminary Dispute Resolution Figures for 2021 (January 26, 2022), https://iccwbo.org/media-wall/news-speeches/icc-unveils-preliminary-dispute-resolution-figures-for-2021/. 5 See ICC, ICC Dispute Resolution 2020 Statistics, at 20, https://iccwbo.org/publication/icc-dispute-resolution-statistics-2020/. [Extracted from the article]