Die Wirtschaftskammer Schweiz-Afrika organisiert, gemeinsam mit weiteren namhaften Partnern, die Tagung "Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit und Streitschlichtung im Mittelmeerraum", die am Freitag, den 07. Oktober 2011 in Basel (Schweiz) stattfinden wird.
Eine Sorge, die zahlreiche kleine und mittlere Unternehmen (und damit die Hauptakteure im Mittelmeerraum) von einem Engagement in diesem Gebiet abh?lt, ist, dass Streitigkeiten vor lokalen Gerien ausgetragen werden m?ssen, die oftmals als langsam, schlecht qualifiziert und korrupt wahrgenommen werden. Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit und Streitschlichtung bieten hier Alternativen, ?ber die die KMU aber in vielen F?llen nur unzureichend informiert sind. Namhafte Redner mit langj?hriger praktischer Erfahrung werden diese M?glichkeiten unter Ber?cksichtigung der Besonderheiten der M?rkte im Mittelmeerraum n?her beleuchten.
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.
ICSID announces its tribunal’s award in Global Trading Resource Corp. and Globex International, Inc. v. Ukraine case. The claim is commercial, not the investment one!
On December 1, 2010 the arbitration tribunal of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes announced its final award in Global Trading Resource Corp. and Globex International, Inc. V. Ukraine case.
On November 24, 2010 the Supreme Court of Ukraine adopted its final ruling on RosUkrEnergo v. Naftogaz Ukrainy JSC case. The Court supported the position of the court of first instance and the appeal court. As we informed in our previous posts that after the arbitral tribunal had issued its award in favor of RosUkrEnergo, the respective motion on its enforcement was filed to the Ukrainian court. The court of first instance satisfied the motion, however its ruling was appealed.
Now, after the cassation instance ruled about the enforcement, there is a chance to challenge the court ruling on the grounds of new circumstances revealed or on the extraordinary grounds. The chance is rather theoretical.
Wie Sie wahrscheinlich wissen, ist der Willem C. Vis Arbitration Moot einer der weltweit gr??ten Studentenwettbewerbe in den Rechtswissenschaften. Die Teilnehmer erstellen ab Anfang Oktober auf der Grundlage eines realit?tsnah aufgearbeiteten Sachverhalts in einem fiktiven Schiedsgerichtsverfahren Schrifts?tze als Kl?ger- und Beklagtenvertreter und bereiten m?ndliche Pl?doyers vor.
The Tribunal found that Ukraine conducted the expropriation of Alpha Projektholding’s rights and interests in the 1998 and 1999 Joint Activities Agreements in violation of Article 4 of the the Agreement for the Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investments between the Republic of Austria and Ukraine (Compensation for Expropriation) and denied fair and equitable to Claimant’s investments in violation of Article 2 of the UABIT (Protection and Promotion of Investments).
However, the Tribunal ruled that Ukraine had not violated Article 8 of the UABIT (Other Obligations) and the national treatment obligation in Article 3 of the UABIT with respect to claimant’s investments. The recognition of violation of the Ukrainian Foreign Investment Law was declined as well.
Ukraine has been ordered to pay USD 2,979,232 with additional interest accruing from July 1, 2004, at a rate of 9.11 percent compounded annually. As stated in the Award, if payment were made on December 31, 2010, total damages owing as of that date would be USD 5,250,782.
Ist es rechtm??ig, in der Schiedsklausel die Staatsangeh?rigkeit oder die Nationalit?t des Schiedsrichters zu fixieren? Die Praxis zeigt, dass dies m?glich ist. Und wenn es um religi?se ?berzeugungen handelt? Englisch Gericht feststellt, dass eine solche Beschr?nkung diskriminierend ist. Die Frage ?ber Diskriminierungsverbote bei der Auswahl der Schiedsrichter wurde wieder aktuell.
After the award in Rosukrenergo (we followed the case in our previous posts) case was issued against the Ukrainian respondent, Ukrainian authorities and state officials announced several options of further actions, including filing an appeal against the award issues by the arbitral tribunal of the Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce.
In addition to those measures the members of the Ukrainian Parliament invented another one.
On 23 November 2010 Ukrainian Bar Association organizes 1st Ukrainian International Conference "International Dispute Resolution: Ukraine, Russia and CIS countries"
The conference provides a unique opportunity for dispute resolution lawyers and in-house counsels from Western countries and CIS to discuss practical issues of cross-border litigation and international arbitration. The conference will also address differences in various jurisdictions and how to deal with exchange of experience.
Konrad & Justich's International Arbitration Practice Group is a highly specialised group of international arbitration lawyers, qualified in multiple jurisdictions, trained and skilled in all areas of dispute resolution and with particular expertise in handling high-profile arbitration cases before major arbitral institutions and ad-hoc panels.
Let me start by stating that formally consumers’ rights in Ukraine are protected and even overprotected. They even may file claims which are free of court fees. However, recently new initiative appeared that was aimed at protection of consumers from “deprivation of rights to be protected by the state court system”. Today, October 20, the core committee of the Ukrainian Parliament gave its positive opinion to the bill that excludes the consumers’ disputes out of the competence of arbitration courts. The bill was registered with the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine on September 9, 2010.
Conducting business internationally it is extremely important to be sure about the bona fide status of your counterparty. This factor is significant for potential disputes and may be considered in two main aspects. First of all the unclear legal status of counterparty may hide certain problems which may cause disputes. Secondly, the outcome of any arbitration or litigation against that party with unclear legal status may be ineffective due to impossibility to enforce an award or court decision.
Wir sind weiterhin eine Reihe von Kommentaren auf diesem Blog zu schreiben und wir wollen an unsere Abonnenten und Lesern f?r eine Pause zu entschuldigen. Der Grund f?r die Pause war die aktive Beteiligung der Autor des Blogs auf den Prozess der Schaffung einer neuen Player im Markt der juristischen Dienstleistungen, die eine Nische von Dienstleistungen im Bereich der internationalen Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit, Handel und Investitionen besetzt hat. Ich bitte Sie herzlich willkommen! Cai & Lenard Anwaltskanzlei
Die Anw?lte der Kanzlei shaffen die Praxis der Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit in der Ukraine. Dieser Blog wird durch die Analyse dieser Praktiken zusammen mit weiteren n?tzlichen Materialien aktualisiert werden. Cai & Lenard Website
RosUkrEnergo, the controversial former intermediary in the supply of Russian and Central Asian gas to Ukraine, has won a key ruling in its arbitration case against Naftogaz, but the Stockholm Arbitration Tribunal has said that the cash-strapped Ukrainian state gas firm Naftogaz must restore 12.1 bcm of gas in storage to RosUkrEnergo rather than paying cash as compensation.
|IHS Global Insight Perspective|
|Significance||The Stockholm Arbitration Tribunal ruling essentially restores ownership title to RosUkrEnergo of 11 bcm of gas in Ukrainian storage that the intermediary claimed was "expropriated" by Naftogaz in the aftermath of the political deal that ended the January 2009 Russia-Ukraine gas dispute and awards a further 1.1 bcm of gas in lieu of damages.|
|Implications||The court ruled that Naftogaz (which has already been held responsible for paying US$197 million in damages to RosUkrEnergo), must provide this 12.1 bcm by 1 September, giving it nearly three months to pump additional supplies into storage and transfer title to this gas to RosUkrEnergo—or come up with another solution.|
|Outlook||Although the arbitration court's ruling is a clear victory for RosUkrEnergo, the decision to award the company (a joint venture between Centragas and Gazprom) in gas rather than in cash means that state-owned Ukrainian firm Naftogaz—which could scarcely afford to pay several billion dollars in cash damages—has dodged a bullet that could have pushed it into bankruptcy.|
RosUkrEnergo is demanding the Stockholm Arbitration that Naftohaz Ukrainy compensate some USD 5.4 billion of losses
RosUkrEnergo (Switzerland) is demanding the Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce that Naftohaz Ukrainy national joint-stock company compensate some USD 5.4 billion of losses for withdrawal of 11 billion cubic meters of gas stored in the Ukrainian repositories, RosUkrEnergo press secretary Andrii Knutov has informed Ukrainian News.
In his words the arbitration court opened hearings within the framework of consideration the dispute between RosUkrEnergo and the national oil and gas company.