The Secretariat of the ICC International Court of Arbitration is currently recruiting a Deputy Counsel for a team dealing principally with common law jurisdictions.
Applicants should be recently qualified lawyers ( i.e. Bar exam or equivalent) with professional experience in a legal environment. However, a formal legal qualification is not essential if a candidate can demonstrate sufficient legal training and experience in international arbitration, international and/or commercial law.
Closing date for applications: 17 December 2015
For more please visit ICC webpage
to contribute to this major survey into costs in international arbitration. The survey
report and conference will provide an invaluable contribution to the debate on costs,
helping to generate proposals to restore speed and cost-effectiveness to the arbitration process.
This is essential if international arbitration is to maintain its position
as the commercial dispute resolution method of choice."
“To make the survey effective, we need corporate counsel, party representatives, arbitrators and tribunal members to give us as much data as possible on arbitrations in which they have been involved.”
Doug Jones SC FCIArb, Vice President of CIArb
The Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (CIArb) has launched a major survey into the costs of international arbitration. The ‘Costs of Arbitration’ survey gathers data to inform parties, legal representatives and arbitrators about the overall costs of international commercial arbitration and how these are incurred at each stage.
International arbitration is a very tricky area, there are too many peculiarities so that even an academic course in this field is only a small amount of knowledge that the practitioner should have. We are often asked by young lawyers starting their practice in arbitration about the general information that could help them to have a general picture of what is arbitration.
Do you want to have a detailed knowledge about what the Guerrilla Tactics in international arbitration and litigation mean and what are counsel’s and the arbitral tribunal’s tools to deal with those? Where does poor behavior end and guerrilla tactics start? How do arbitral institutions view the issue of Guerrilla Tactics? How may arbitral institutions and state courts support fighting Guerrilla Practices? How much state court support is desirable?
Recently the arbitration court at the public association “Ukrainian arbitration union” (Odessa) issued an award. That award was adopted after the hearings which were held by means of telecommunication. The participants presented their position to the arbitration court in video conference. The award was announced to the parties through a web-cam as well. Later on the award was signed as a written document and forwarded to the parties. This event became a ground for discussion in Ukrainian specialized mass media. Some of my colleagues treated that event as a step to implementation and propagation of the Internet-arbitration concept. Though I welcome that progressive practice I am far from believing that e-arbitration is limited to or its main feature consists of the possibility of web-hearings. Electronic form arbitration clause (agreement), e-claim, admissibility of electronic evidences, turnover of electronic documents during the process and enforceability of an electronic award, - that is an inexhaustive list of main issues related to the e-arbitration concept. If the reader is interested in that matter I would recommend to familiarize with the document “International commercial arbitration. 5.9. Electronic arbitration” prepared under the auspices of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD).
Although arbitration and mediation are both forms of alternative dispute resolution and the second one is popularized by several institutions in Ukraine it still may not be treated as a competitor to arbitration.
There is no specific regulation allowing or prohibiting online arbitration in Ukraine at the time. Actually there is no Ukrainian practice of online arbitration. However, I have already heard “well grounded” opinions of specialists in arbitration concerning online ADR and its future in Ukraine. Those opinions seemed interesting to me because (1) they are based on subjective understanding of the term “online arbitration” and (2) for the mentioned reason they jeopardize the idea of online arbitration. Let me explain. The term “online arbitration” is often replaced with the terms “e-arbitration” and “virtual arbitration” which have almost synonymous meaning. In the Ukrainian language the word “online” and prefix “e-“ are rather foreign substance. Thus, “virtual arbitration” remains. However, for Ukrainian legal brains virtual is something fake. Moreover, during several years (2005-2009) local arbitration courts were often misused. Many times they were used as an instrument of legitimization of title to real estate. Taking into account that usually there was no dispute in such real estate cases the proceedings were “virtual”: no evidences presented, no hearings took place.
Thank heaven that the experts supported by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) developed the concept of electronic arbitration. This is what may be implemented in the Ukrainian legal practice though it may take years.