Learn more about the Artemis Accords, which were announced by NASA in May 2020 as a set of principles on the basis of which the US would enter into agreements with other countries to govern the civil exploration and use of outer space and lunar resources.
(7/10/20)Charles Harris, Amy Schmitz
In this episode of the Arbitration Conversation Amy interviews Charles E. Harris II, who is a Partner in the Litigation and Dispute Resolution Group and the International Arbitration Group at Mayer Brown in Chicago.
In late June, four major civil society groups released a model dispute resolution system, focused on model arbitration clauses, for disputes on labor standards in supply-chain operations. Read a summary of the new dispute resolution system here.
Uber’s service agreement for the drivers of its food delivery services in Canada required them to resolve any dispute with Uber through arbitration in the Netherlands. The Supreme Court of Canada on appeal allowed the driver’s class action to proceed in the Ontario Courts and found the arbitration clause in the Uber drivers’ contracts to be ‘unconscionable’.
This article provides guidance for virtually conducting oral hearings for arbitration processes with the COVID-19 crisis having diminished face-to-face meetings and having forced the legal profession to adapt. Five concerns are identified 1) Hearing platform, 2) Document presentation, 3) Confidentiality and security, 4) Witness examination, and 5) Advocacy.
This two part article provides guidance for virtually conducting oral hearings for arbitration processes, focusing on five considerations: 1) Hearing platform, 2) Document presentation, 3) Confidentiality and security, 4) Witness examination, 5) Advocacy. Part 1 provided an analysis of the first two, and this article (Part 2) analyzes the final three.
The article provides a case summary of the Florida state appellate court ruling that the incorporation of American Arbitration Association (AAA) Rules in an arbitration agreement did not provide clear and unmistakable evidence that only the arbitrator could decide the issue of arbitrability, in lieu of the courts.
A former employee of WeWorks Companies Inc. has petitioned a Federal District Court in New York to allow a review of its earlier decision which compelled her to pursue her job discrimination claims based on race and sex through arbitration, rather than before the Courts.
The Covid-19 crisis has had a deep impact on international arbitration as the parties, counsel, and arbitrators have been forced to adapt to a new reality of remote hearings due to the travel restrictions and social distancing measures. They are also facing the critical issue of whether to postpone planned physical hearings that cannot be held due to the restrictions or to hold them remotely using modern technologies.
(7/05/20)Michelle Li, Tianyu Ma
This Article discusses the case of Amarante v. Intermarine, where the civil courts in the Peoples’ Republic of China (PRC) were confronted with the issue of whether a foreign arbitral award could be recognized and enforced in the PRC, against a foreign company which was not incorporated there.
(7/05/20)Richard Frankel, Amy Schmitz
In this episode of the Arbitration Conversation Amy interviews Prof. Richard Frankel, Associate Professor of Law and Director of the Federal Litigation and Appeals Clinic at the Drexel University Thomas Klein School of Law.
(6/29/20)Henry Allen Blair
Henry Schein Part I focused on the wholly groundless doctrine. The wholly groundless doctrine, you might recall, was basically a smell test for arbitrability. It gave courts the right to regulate dubious arbitration agreements even if those agreements included a delegation provision. A unanimous Supreme Court sounded the death knell on the doctrine. Today, SCOTUS took the case up again.
(6/29/20)Sarah Rudolph Cole, Amy Schmitz
Check out the latest episode of the Arbitration Conversation, where Amy interviews Prof. Sarah Cole of the Moritz College of Law at Ohio State University.
As federal agencies begin to regulate arbitration within their areas of expertise, questions arise regarding the agency's authority to do so in light of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). This article presents a framework for analyzing these regulations in light of the FAA.
This article explores the recent English Court of Appeal decision in Enka Insaat v Chubb. The issue in that case was whether a mere choice of London seat (without any express choice of English law and without any ongoing arbitration) was sufficient for the grant of an anti-suit injunction to restrain foreign proceedings and/or constituted an implied choice of English law.
(6/26/20)Mohamed S. Abdel Wahab, Amy Schmitz
Check out the latest episode of The Arbitration Conversation where Amy Schmitz interviews Mohamed Abdel Wahab on arbitration in Egypt.
(6/19/20)Tom Stipanowich, Amy Schmitz
Check out the latest episode of The Arbitration Conversation where Amy Schmitz interviews Tom Stipanowich about mixed mode arbitration and his concept of "arbigotiation" which keeps the door open to negotiated or mediated resolutions within an arbitration process.
(6/18/20)Frank Lazzara, MaryEllen Redmond
M&A arbitrations often do not require a hearing. In fact, when one considers the lack of detail within most M&A purchase and sale agreements an arbitration process without a hearing can seem quite fulsome. Transactional documents are often sufficient, when combined with an arbitrator’s initial joint party call, to advance most matters to the development of a proposed procedural timeline to specify the dispute resolution process without necessitating a live hearing.
The Covid-19 pandemic has led to a surge of interest in the form of alternative dispute resolution. In particular, arbitration has gained prominence, owing to its flexibility and pragmatism. Arbitration has been using technology more prominently than traditional litigation, despite complex cases involving the management of voluminous evidentiary records. In the face of a pandemic, arbitration is pivoting towards the digitalization of arbitral proceedings, bringing the aptitude of arbitrators in handling the challenges presented by the new era into focus.
(6/17/20)Benjamin Davis, Amy Schmitz
In this episode Amy Schmitz interviews Ben Davis about diversity in arbitration, with a particular focus on the new Diversity and Inclusion Policy that was recently issued by ICCA (the International Council of Commercial Arbitration).
The first quarter of 2020 has been an active period for the SIAC Secretariat. It is common practice for SIAC tribunals to conduct the preliminary case management conference telephonically or virtually. However, given the dramatic change in the arbitration landscape in the past few months, SIAC tribunals have successfully conducted a variety of hearings remotely, including applications for emergency interim relief and evidentiary hearings.
(6/16/20)Robert Bailey, Amy Schmitz
In this episode of Arbitration Conversation Amy Schmitz interviews Prof. Bob Bailey of Mizzou Law on the new unanimous Supreme Court decision (authored by Justice Gorsuch) around the enforceability of arbitration for gig workers in the transportation sector and the interpretation of the FAA's applicability in state court.
Catharine Titi's article "The nationality of the international judge: Policy options for the Multilateral Investment Court" discusses how the drafters of the statute for the Court could address issues relating to the nationality of the judges, including whether they should include national and ad hoc judges. She recommends that the court should only select judges in its membership, aim for reasonable geographic representation without lowering standards for qualification, and that they should probably not allow national and ad hoc judges.
(6/15/20)David Larson, Amy Schmitz
In this episode of Arbitration Conversation Amy speaks with Professor Dave Larson of the Mitchell Hamline School of Law on accessibility in mediation, arbitration, and online dispute resolution
Click here for MORE ARTICLES
On January 1, 2020, a new law in California took effect to provide rights to consumers and employees facing arbitration. The law requires that the business must pay the initial fees or costs of arbitration where the employees or consumers are to arbitrate any claims related to their contracts or state/federal law.