Given the confidential nature of arbitration, gathering the relevant information means personal phone calls with individuals who have appeared before a potential arbitrator or, better yet, sat as a co-arbitrator with that person. This kind of ad hoc individual research largely confines assessment of potential arbitrators to feedback from a limited number of individuals. Despite this limited scope, ad hoc research can be time-consuming (and therefore costly), but not always reliable. Without broad data against which to evaluate these inputs, however, it is impossible to determine whether the feedback is broadly representative, readily transferrable to the case at hand, or just an outlier.
In the final conversations from Sydney, we first talk to Campbell McLachlan and Matthew Weiniger about the second edition of their book on substantive principles in international investment law. It's been 10 years since the first edition: what has happened during the work with the second [TIME 08:41]? We then talk to Catherine Rogers about Arbitrator Intelligence, which aims to change the process through which arbitrators are appointed, away from the old school phone calls and into the 21st century [TIME 32:08]. The final segment is a Happy Fun Time one. Business development at law firms: what is it and must we all engage in it [TIME 01:10:32]?
HELSINKI--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Helsinki International Arbitration Day 2018 (www.hiad.fi) will be held on Thursday, 24 May 2018 in Helsinki. The event gathers international arbitration and dispute resolution experts to Helsinki for the seventh time. The day's theme is “Shaping the Future of International Arbitration”. Among the topics addressed during the conference day will be public-private arbitration, sports arbitration, users’ perspective on the future of international arbitration, legal tech and legal design.
Organized by the Cambridge University Graduate Law Society, Cambridge Arbitration Day is a daylong conference that brings together scholars, practitioners, and students from across the globe to discuss the latest developments in international arbitration. This year’s conference, the fifth, will explore international arbitration as a market, as the field continues to grow and take on competitive, market-like characteristics.
Rogers’ address, which will open the conference, is entitled “Competition in the International Arbitration Market: A Race to the Top?” She will discuss how, in the marketplace for international arbitration, competition is everywhere: Arbitrators compete for appointments, attorneys compete for clients, states compete to be designated as arbitral seats, institutions compete to administer proceedings, experts compete to provide opinions, various arbitration organizations and academics compete to influence developments in the field, third-party funders compete to finance cases, and the parties compete to prevail in the substantive disputes.
Rogers will examine these competitive forces, and the extent to which they encourage a race to the top or risk a race to the bottom.
Read the new Kluwer Blog Post by Catherine Rogers, explaining how the Arbitrator Intelligence Questionnaire can tap into both our “inner Machiavellis” and the “better angels of our nature” to promote a more diverse field of international arbitrators.
A strange paradox marks the debate about international arbitrator diversity.
Public consensus increasingly reflects a pervasive concern about the lack of diversity among international arbitrators. ArbitralWomen can claim much credit for focusing attention on the lack of gender diversity, as evidenced by now more than 2500 signatures on The Pledge. Meanwhile, many corporate users now insist that firms include diverse candidates on lists of proposed arbitrators.
Arbitrator Intelligence (AI), founded by Penn State Law professor Catherine Rogers, officially launched its Arbitrator Intelligence Questionnaire (AIQ) in Singapore on June 1 by signing an agreement with the Singapore International Arbitration Center (SIAC) at Drew & Napier headquarters in Singapore.
After several years in the planning, one year in the making, and many months in the testing, AI formally launched the AIQ, beginning in Singapore at an event on June 1 hosted by the Davinder Singh of the Drew & Napier law firm, supported by the Singapore International Arbitration Center (SIAC), and officiated by AI Advisory Board Member Gary Born. AI Advisor Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon also graciously supported the event.
Rogers opened the Energy Arbitration 2017 Conference with a discussion focusing on how Arbitrator Intelligence can improve the diversity of international arbitration tribunals and address transparency issues in international arbitration.
On March 27, the University of Pennsylvania Law School held a student-led conference on the Contemporary Issues and Emerging Trends in International Arbitration. The event gathered leading international arbitration scholars and practitioners from all around the world, including our Founder and Executive Director, Professor Catherine Rogers. One of the highlights of the event was the keynote address delivered by Mr. Gary Born.
Berwin Leighton Paisner recently published a thoughtful and much-welcomed study on diversity. The study collects and analyses the latest statistics on the international arbitration community’s stand on diversity. Some of the numbers are particularly striking.
In December 2016, Gary Born gave a keynote at the CIArb Young Members Group Annual Conference in London. His speech focused on the importance of AI as a resource for young and aspiring arbitrators, and more generally for the legitimacy crisis in international arbitration.
German arbitration specialist and AI Member Stephan Wilske recently published an excellent paper, “Linguistic and Language Issues in International Arbitration – Problems, Pitfalls and Paranoia.” In this work, Stephan explains how English is presumed to be the lingua franca of international arbitration. This presumption tends to give native English speakers an upper hand and marginalize non-native speakers. Mr. Wilske’s article encourages non-native English speakers to not accept this situation and he argues that only a truly multi-lingual and multi-cultural approach is successful.
“Arbitration counsel want to win.” That is how a recent article by Edna Sussman begins. She goes on to explain that “Understanding how arbitrators think, what they favor, how they make decisions, and how they work together can guide counsel in devising their strategy and developing their presentations. For their part, arbitrators want to provide a fair hearing that meets the parties’ needs.” In responding to these needs, Sussman explains how information is the answer, even for other arbitrators. “Knowing how other arbitrators handle various procedural aspects, what influences their thinking, and what they prefer can inform arbitrators in conducting their own arbitrations most effectively.” To help provide that information, Sussman introduces results from a survey in which she asked arbitrators about their case management preferences, which hold many interesting insights.
On June 10, Yemi Candide-Johnson, president of the Lagos Court of Arbitration (LCA), and Catherine Rogers, Founder of Arbitrator Intelligence, led a Discussion Forum in Lagos, Nigeria, to take up “Ten Action Items to Increase the Footprint of Africa in International Arbitration.” The Discussion Forum was an effort to prompt a meaningful conversation about how to operationalize and concretize the often-articulated goal of increasing the number of African arbitrators, particularly when then involve African parties and transactions affecting Africa.
In his recent article in the CPR Magazine, “Transparency in International Arbitration,” James Hope–a world renowned arbitration specialist, partner and head of the Vinge’s dispute resolution group in Stockholm–identified Arbitrator Intelligence a“welcome attempt to prevent such complacency on the part of some arbitrators.”
On March 3rd, 2016, Salua Kamerow, Ambassador for the Latin-American Outreach Initiative of Arbitrator Intelligence (AI), was invited to lecture to the students, professors and professionals of two Universities in Santa Marta, Colombia; Universidad Cooperativa de Colombia and Universidad del Magdalena.
AI is not alone in the quest to bring more data-driven analysis to arbitrator assessments. In a recent study published in the Global Arbitration Review, Rishab Gupta and Katrina Limond from Allen & Overy used citation analysis to measure arbitrator influence in investment treaty arbitration. The study aims at providing added information during a critical phase of international arbitration – selection of an arbitrator. Given the inefficiencies associated with this phase of arbitration, the article points towards how word of mouth was the most commonly used approach to selection; an approach which could be both unreliable as well as incomplete.