International arbitration News, analytics and practice

22Oct/140

Ukraine is awaiting the ruling of the Stockholm arbitration court in the gas dispute

Ukraine is awaiting the ruling of the Stockholm arbitration court concerning the temporary gas price in the gas dispute with Russia to appear late in November 2014, Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk has said.

Ukrainian state-run energy firm Naftogaz and Russian state-controlled gas firm Gazprom have both lodged cases with the Stockholm arbitration tribunal to review their gas transit contracts. All debt payments, on which Russia has been insisting, will be made only after a verdict from the International Court of Arbitration in Stockholm - (Reuters).

16Sep/141

Enforcement of Arbitration Awards in Ukraine: Chances are Measured

By , Cai & Lenard

From http://kluwerarbitrationblog.com

Arbitration awards enforcement Ukraine Enforcement of Arbitration Awards in Ukraine: Chances are Measured

Ukraine has a reputation of a country with an imperfect justice system. No wonder that the country is also pictured by many arbitration practitioners as one unfriendly to arbitration, though refusals to grant the leave for enforcement of arbitral awards in Ukraine are relatively rare – 10% and 18% of all requests considered in 2013 and 2014 respectively, according to the Statistical Report “Ukraine. Arbitration-friendly jurisdiction: 2013-2014” prepared by Cai & Lenard.


4Aug/140

Enforcement of Worldwide Freezing Orders in Ukraine

By Cai & Lenard
From http://kluwerarbitrationblog.com

(Full article available at Publications).

I. General Aspects of Enforceability

English Worldwide Freezing Order (“WFO”) being called by Matthias Scherer and Simone Nadelhofer one of the “nuclear weapons” of commercial litigation and arbitration, is a preliminary injunction preventing a defendant from disposing of assets pending the resolution of the underlying substantive (arbitration or court) proceedings. Its issue in support of an arbitration proceeding significantly impacts further enforcement of an award. However, as WFOs are often sought without prior notice to the defendant, their recognition and enforcement may become problematic. Ukrainian courts only recently were addressed issues related to enforceability of WFOs.

25Jul/140

New LCIA Arbitration Rules, effective 1 October 2014

The London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA) is pleased to announce that the new LCIA Arbitration Rules have been formally adopted by the LCIA Court and the LCIA Board of Directors. The Rules will come into effect on 1 October 2014.

The new Rules ensure an effective, efficient and fair process. Notable changes in the Rules include provisions on consolidation and on conduct of legal representatives and parties, as well as expanded provisions on emergency relief.

24Jul/140

New words every lawyer should know – NeoLAWgisms

When lawyer says "lawesome" it means awesome and does not break the law

lawsome1 New words every lawyer should know   NeoLAWgisms

-

8Jul/140

Evidence in International Arbitration: Evaluation Criteria

(extract from Konstantin Pilkov. Evidence in International Arbitration: Criteria for Admission and Evaluation. Arbitration. – 2014. – Vol. 80. – Issue 2 2014)

It is commonly recognised that the admissibility of evidence does not automatically guarantee that the evidence will be considered as having probative value. There are more or less explicit relevance, admissibility and materiality criteria for determining whether a piece of evidence is admissible, whereas the methods for weighing evidence and determining the sufficient level of proof are subjective and somewhat inexplicable.[1] The weight of the evidence usually refers to its persuasive effect on the arbitrator’s mind. It is within the discretion of the tribunal to evaluate the evidence submitted by the parties, though the parties can agree on the sufficiency, as will be discussed later.

The weight of the evidence includes questions of credibility (reliability) and the evaluation of inferences which can be made from the evidence.

19Jun/140

Online moot court platform

Mootus is a free online moot court platform that allows students or lawyers to compete legal issues As announced by owners of the platform, Mootus was aimed at helping law students and lawyers build skills, reputation and knowledge for free through open, online legal argument.

10Jun/140

ICSID Review—Foreign Investment Law Journal Student Writing Competition

The International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) is pleased to announce the AnnualICSID Review—Foreign Investment Law Journal Student Writing Competition.

2Jun/140

Assignment of Benefits of Arbitral Awards: Problematic Enforcement in Ukraine

By Cai & Lenard
From Kluwer Arbitration Blog
arbitration lawyer Assignment of Benefits of Arbitral Awards: Problematic Enforcement in Ukraine

Assignment of benefits of arbitral awards is a standard business practice worldwide, undertaken by companies involved in international trade and supported by credit insurers. However, this practice may face some obstacles in Ukraine considering contradictory and poorly developed court practice of granting leave for enforcement upon an application submitted by any person other than a person who was the party to arbitration. Courts are rather formalistic in deciding on that matter as Ukrainian laws do not directly envisage the possibility to an application for leave to enforce an international arbitration award to be submitted by any person other than a creditor (the meaning of this term is sometimes narrow, so that it is understood as a synonym to a party to arbitration). Actually, until recently there are not so many court cases, if any at all, in which the matter of assignment of benefits of arbitral award was clearly addressed.

11May/140

New ICDR Rules!

New version of the International Dispute Resolution Procedures (Including Mediation and Arbitration Rules) as well as amended Fee Schedule become effective on June 1, 2014

9May/140

Best Practices for the Appointment and Use of Arbitral Secretaries

When used properly, arbitral secretaries can support arbitral tribunals in performing their mandate with greater efficiency and effectiveness.
Given the potential benefits in efficiency and cost savings that an arbitral secretary can bring to the arbitral process, the Young ICCA Task Force on the Appointment and Use of Arbitral Secretaries was formed to examine the use of arbitral secretaries and advance a more transparent and robust approach to the role of secretaries in arbitration.

ICCA Arbitration Best Practices for the Appointment and Use of Arbitral Secretaries

5May/140

Evidence in International Arbitration: Criteria for Admission

(extract from Konstantin Pilkov. Evidence in International Arbitration: Criteria for Admission and Evaluation. Arbitration. – 2014. – Vol. 80. – Issue 2 2014)

Arbitration rules give broad authority to arbitrators regarding the consideration of evidence.[1] They usually do not set any formal procedure of admission and evaluation of evidence and say little if anything about the criteria for such admission and evaluation. The UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules (as revised in 2010) art.27(4) provide that once a party offers evidence to prove the facts it relies on, the tribunal is required to “determine the admissibility, relevance, materiality, and weight of the evidence offered”.

1Apr/140

What is a Lawyer and What Do They Do?

Did you know that Ukrainian lawyers invented a new data storage device capable of storing 1 Gigibit information? This device is a million times more powerful that the best flash memory card.

What is this device? It’s a cat! It has revealed that four cards with several cute cats on them are able to store all available  information about lawyers and law practice.

Doubt that? Evidence is below.

30Jul/130

European Arbitration Law Firms Directory

The following is a list of the Europe-based law firms with strong international arbitration expertise. The list only includes law firms which are headquartered or co-headquartered in the European countries.

16Jul/130

Binding Recalcitrant Respondents to Default Arbitral Awards

by Martin Andrew Jarrett

Overview

When may an arbitral panel bind non-consenting respondents to a default award proposed by the claimant and other consenting respondents?  In Grant Thornton International Ltd. (the “Claimant”) v. JBPB & Co. (a partnership) (the “Respondents”) [2013] HKCFI 523, the High Court of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Court of First Instance (Construction and Arbitration Proceedings) (the “Court”) had occasion to rule on this question.