Third-party funding in international arbitration remains a vague and elusive concept. This article posits that the international arbitration community’s struggle to define third-party funding is a consequence of its failure to address broader policy concerns over fairness in international arbitration. The policy concerns over fairness in international arbitration should be seen as a priority and tackled with practical solutions that ensure equality of arms and access to capital. It is only after such policy concerns have been addressed that a rational definition of third-party funding can be achieved.
{"title":"The Third-Party Funding Debate:A Misguided Focus on Definitions at the Expense of Policy Considerations","authors":"R. Teitelbaum","doi":"10.54648/bcdr2018004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/bcdr2018004","url":null,"abstract":"Third-party funding in international arbitration remains a vague and elusive concept. This article posits that the international arbitration community’s struggle to define third-party funding is a consequence of its failure to address broader policy concerns over fairness in international arbitration. The policy concerns over fairness in international arbitration should be seen as a priority and tackled with practical solutions that ensure equality of arms and access to capital. It is only after such policy concerns have been addressed that a rational definition of third-party funding can be achieved.","PeriodicalId":166341,"journal":{"name":"BCDR International Arbitration Review","volume":"104 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124662809","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
There are no provisions specifically governing third-party funding in French law. Unlike some common law systems, which are more restrictive in this respect, French law does not prevent the use of third-party funding in international arbitration.As amply attested in case law and legal commentary, France generally adopts a liberal approach to international arbitration. There are nonetheless areas where caution is called for.A case in point is the ethical duties of counsel dealing with funders.The Paris Bar recently took the unprecedented step of issuing a resolution that provides interesting and useful guidelines on this matter.
{"title":"The French Approach to Third-Party Funding:A Balance between Liberalism and Cautiousness","authors":"Jalal El Ahdab","doi":"10.54648/bcdr2018010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/bcdr2018010","url":null,"abstract":"There are no provisions specifically governing third-party funding in French law. Unlike some common law systems, which are more restrictive in this respect, French law does not prevent the use of third-party funding in international arbitration.As amply attested in case law and legal commentary, France generally adopts a liberal approach to international arbitration. There are nonetheless areas where caution is called for.A case in point is the ethical duties of counsel dealing with funders.The Paris Bar recently took the unprecedented step of issuing a resolution that provides interesting and useful guidelines on this matter.","PeriodicalId":166341,"journal":{"name":"BCDR International Arbitration Review","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126390859","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In June 2017, Hong Kong passed legislation amending the Hong Kong Arbitration Ordinance to permit third-party funding of arbitration, mediation, and related proceedings.These amendments had all taken effect by February 1, 2019. Hong Kong’s regulatory regime requires third-party funders to comply with the financial and ethical standards set out in the Code of Practice for Third Party Funders of Arbitration, issued on December 7, 2018. This article explains why Hong Kong concluded that third-party funding of arbitration, mediation, and related proceedings under the Hong Kong Arbitration Ordinance should be allowed, why it needs to be regulated, and the key provisions at the heart of Hong’s Kong’s “light touch” regulatory approach embodied in the Code of Practice. The article also touches on a number of emerging issues, including whether an arbitral tribunal should have the power to make an adverse costs order against a third-party funder and the recoverability of the funder’s benefit under the funding agreement following Essar Oilfields Services Ltd. v. Norscott Rig Management Ltd.
{"title":"Third-Party Funding of Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution in Hong Kong","authors":"K. Rooney","doi":"10.54648/bcdr2018013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/bcdr2018013","url":null,"abstract":"In June 2017, Hong Kong passed legislation amending the Hong Kong Arbitration Ordinance to permit third-party funding of arbitration, mediation, and related proceedings.These amendments had all taken effect by February 1, 2019. Hong Kong’s regulatory regime requires third-party funders to comply with the financial and ethical standards set out in the Code of Practice for Third Party Funders of Arbitration, issued on December 7, 2018. This article explains why Hong Kong concluded that third-party funding of arbitration, mediation, and related proceedings under the Hong Kong Arbitration Ordinance should be allowed, why it needs to be regulated, and the key provisions at the heart of Hong’s Kong’s “light touch” regulatory approach embodied in the Code of Practice. The article also touches on a number of emerging issues, including whether an arbitral tribunal should have the power to make an adverse costs order against a third-party funder and the recoverability of the funder’s benefit under the funding agreement following Essar Oilfields Services Ltd. v. Norscott Rig Management Ltd.","PeriodicalId":166341,"journal":{"name":"BCDR International Arbitration Review","volume":"103 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124862644","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Since March 1, 2017, third-party funding in international arbitration and related proceedings has been permitted in Singapore.This has brought Singapore into closer alignment with practices in other major centers of international arbitration. This article will discuss the development of third-party funding in Singapore and how this method of funding may develop in the future.
{"title":"Leading the Way:Third-Party Funding in International Arbitration in Singapore","authors":"Yin Wai Chan, M. Hwang","doi":"10.54648/bcdr2018012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/bcdr2018012","url":null,"abstract":"Since March 1, 2017, third-party funding in international arbitration and related proceedings has been permitted in Singapore.This has brought Singapore into closer alignment with practices in other major centers of international arbitration. This article will discuss the development of third-party funding in Singapore and how this method of funding may develop in the future.","PeriodicalId":166341,"journal":{"name":"BCDR International Arbitration Review","volume":"123 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133746053","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Australia is renowned as a leading jurisdiction for litigation funding, underpinned by an expanding market and generally supportive legislature and judiciary. Less clear is the Australian approach to third-party funding in international arbitration. In an exploration of the Australian litigation funding landscape, this article seeks to understand whether any lessons can be gleaned in addressing the growing role of third-party funding in international arbitration.Through a consideration of the discrete issues of disclosure, confidentiality, costs orders, and security for costs, it is clear that both the Australian and international responses to litigation funding offer valuable guidance on issues surrounding third-party funding in international dispute resolution.
{"title":"Third-Party Funding in International Arbitration: Useful Experience from Australia","authors":"Douglas N. Jones","doi":"10.54648/bcdr2018011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/bcdr2018011","url":null,"abstract":"Australia is renowned as a leading jurisdiction for litigation funding, underpinned by an expanding market and generally supportive legislature and judiciary. Less clear is the Australian approach to third-party funding in international arbitration. In an exploration of the Australian litigation funding landscape, this article seeks to understand whether any lessons can be gleaned in addressing the growing role of third-party funding in international arbitration.Through a consideration of the discrete issues of disclosure, confidentiality, costs orders, and security for costs, it is clear that both the Australian and international responses to litigation funding offer valuable guidance on issues surrounding third-party funding in international dispute resolution.","PeriodicalId":166341,"journal":{"name":"BCDR International Arbitration Review","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127891030","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Third-party funding is increasingly used in relation to international arbitration claims. However, whilst the basic concept and framework are well known to most lawyers, many are less familiar with the practicalities, industry conventions, and broader alternative financing and risk management options available.This article discusses how arbitration finance deals are structured and priced in practice, how this has evolved in recent years with the growth of the market and the emergence of new funding structures, and the increasing interplay between law firm fee structures and external finance.
{"title":"Third-Party Funding Pricing and Deal Structures","authors":"James Blick","doi":"10.54648/bcdr2018006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/bcdr2018006","url":null,"abstract":"Third-party funding is increasingly used in relation to international arbitration claims. However, whilst the basic concept and framework are well known to most lawyers, many are less familiar with the practicalities, industry conventions, and broader alternative financing and risk management options available.This article discusses how arbitration finance deals are structured and priced in practice, how this has evolved in recent years with the growth of the market and the emergence of new funding structures, and the increasing interplay between law firm fee structures and external finance.","PeriodicalId":166341,"journal":{"name":"BCDR International Arbitration Review","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133027572","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The emergence of third-party funding in investor-state dispute settlement adds to the problems and challenges already facing a dispute resolution regime whose compatibility with sustainable economic and social development goals, if not its entire legitimacy, has been called into question. A task force jointly constituted by ICCA and Queen Mary University of London recently produced a report in which it articulated principles relating to disclosure and conflicts of interest, privilege and professional secrecy, the allocation of costs, and security for costs, which were intended to introduce clarity and consistency into third-party-funding practices in international arbitration. Although promising in some respects, the principles were conservative in others. This article identifies some shortcomings in the principles put forward by the task force and proposes adjustments to some of their conservative aspects. In so doing, it touches on the broader question of the suitability of third-party funding to investor-state dispute settlement, given the system’s particularities.
{"title":"Third-Party Funding in Investment Treaty Arbitration: Revisiting the Findings of the ICCA-Queen Mary Task Force","authors":"Mahmoud M. Elkharashy","doi":"10.54648/bcdr2018003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/bcdr2018003","url":null,"abstract":"The emergence of third-party funding in investor-state dispute settlement adds to the problems and challenges already facing a dispute resolution regime whose compatibility with sustainable economic and social development goals, if not its entire legitimacy, has been called into question. A task force jointly constituted by ICCA and Queen Mary University of London recently produced a report in which it articulated principles relating to disclosure and conflicts of interest, privilege and professional secrecy, the allocation of costs, and security for costs, which were intended to introduce clarity and consistency into third-party-funding practices in international arbitration. Although promising in some respects, the principles were conservative in others. This article identifies some shortcomings in the principles put forward by the task force and proposes adjustments to some of their conservative aspects. In so doing, it touches on the broader question of the suitability of third-party funding to investor-state dispute settlement, given the system’s particularities.","PeriodicalId":166341,"journal":{"name":"BCDR International Arbitration Review","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133051632","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Article 28: Joinder 28.1 At any time following the Chamber’s notice of the commencement of the arbitration pursuant to Article 3, and before the appointment of the arbitral tribunal, a party wishing to join an additional party to the arbitration shall submit to the Chamber, and at the same time to all other parties to the arbitration and to the additional party, a written request for arbitration against the additional party (the ‘Request for Joinder’), including or accompanied by all the items prescribed for a Request in accordance with Article 2.2. 28.2 The additional party shall submit a response to the Request for Joinder (the ‘Response to Request for Joinder’), the time limit, form and content of which shall be as prescribed for a Response in accordance with Article 4. 28.3 The Chamber shall join the additional party to the existing arbitration, provided that no additional party shall be joined pursuant to Article 28.1 unless the Chamber is prima facie satisfied that an arbitration agreement conforming to Article 1.1 may exist between all the parties, including the additional party. 28.4 At any time following the appointment of the arbitral tribunal, a party wishing to join an additional party to the arbitration shall proceed in the manner prescribed by Article 28.1, provided always that: (a) the additional party shall not be joined after the appointment of the arbitral tribunal unless all parties to the arbitration and the additional party so agree in writing, and further agree that the additional party shall waive any right to participate in the selection of the arbitral tribunal that it would or might have had, had it been joined prior to the appointment of the arbitral tribunal; (b) the arbitral tribunal shall, after consultation with the parties, determine in its sole discretion whether the additional party should be joined, taking into account the stage of the arbitration, whether joinder would serve the interests of justice and efficiency, and such other matters as it considers appropriate in the circumstances of the case; and (c) the arbitral tribunal, if it permits joinder, shall determine the time, form and content of any Response to Request for Joinder. 28.5 If joined, the additional party shall be a party to the arbitration for all purposes. 28.6 A Request for Joinder and a Response to Request for Joinder may, but need not, be submitted to the Chamber using the Chamber’s online filing form located at www.bcdr-aaa.org. Article 29: Consolidation 29.1 If two or more arbitrations subject to these Rules are commenced pursuant to the same arbitration agreement and between the same parties, the Chamber may, in its discretion and after consultation with the parties, consolidate the arbitrations into a single arbitration subject to these Rules, provided that no arbitral tribunal has yet been appointed in any of the arbitrations to be consolidated. 29.2 Following the appointment of the arbitral tribunal, the arbitral tribunal shall, on the
{"title":"Joinder and Consolidation","authors":"G. Born, D. V. V. Krishna Prasad","doi":"10.54648/bcdr2020004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/bcdr2020004","url":null,"abstract":"Article 28: Joinder\u000028.1 At any time following the Chamber’s notice of the commencement of the arbitration pursuant to Article 3, and before the appointment of the arbitral tribunal, a party wishing to join an additional party to the arbitration shall submit to the Chamber, and at the same time to all other parties to the arbitration and to the additional party, a written request for arbitration against the additional party (the ‘Request for Joinder’), including or accompanied by all the items prescribed for a Request in accordance with Article 2.2.\u000028.2 The additional party shall submit a response to the Request for Joinder (the ‘Response to Request for Joinder’), the time limit, form and content of which shall be as prescribed for a Response in accordance with Article 4.\u000028.3 The Chamber shall join the additional party to the existing arbitration, provided that no additional party shall be joined pursuant to Article 28.1 unless the Chamber is prima facie satisfied that an arbitration agreement conforming to Article 1.1 may exist between all the parties, including the additional party.\u000028.4 At any time following the appointment of the arbitral tribunal, a party wishing to join an additional party to the arbitration shall proceed in the manner prescribed by Article 28.1, provided always that:\u0000(a) the additional party shall not be joined after the appointment of the arbitral tribunal unless all parties to the arbitration and the additional party so agree in writing, and further agree that the additional party shall waive any right to participate in the selection of the arbitral tribunal that it would or might have had, had it been joined prior to the appointment of the arbitral tribunal;\u0000(b) the arbitral tribunal shall, after consultation with the parties, determine in its sole discretion whether the additional party should be joined, taking into account the stage of the arbitration, whether joinder would serve the interests of justice and efficiency, and such other matters as it considers appropriate in the circumstances of the case; and\u0000(c) the arbitral tribunal, if it permits joinder, shall determine the time, form and content of any Response to Request for Joinder.\u000028.5 If joined, the additional party shall be a party to the arbitration for all purposes.\u000028.6 A Request for Joinder and a Response to Request for Joinder may, but need not, be submitted to the Chamber using the Chamber’s online filing form located at www.bcdr-aaa.org.\u0000Article 29: Consolidation\u000029.1 If two or more arbitrations subject to these Rules are commenced pursuant to the same arbitration agreement and between the same parties, the Chamber may, in its discretion and after consultation with the parties, consolidate the arbitrations into a single arbitration subject to these Rules, provided that no arbitral tribunal has yet been appointed in any of the arbitrations to be consolidated.\u000029.2 Following the appointment of the arbitral tribunal, the arbitral tribunal shall, on the ","PeriodicalId":166341,"journal":{"name":"BCDR International Arbitration Review","volume":"94 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124814058","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Article 22: Hearings and witnesses 22.1 The arbitral tribunal shall give the parties reasonable notice of the date, time and place of any oral hearing. 22.2 At least 15 days before the hearing, each party shall give the arbitral tribunal and the other parties the name and address of any witness it intends to present, the subject of the witness’s testimony and the language in which such witness will give his or her testimony. 22.3 The arbitral tribunal shall determine the manner in which witnesses are examined and who shall be present during witness examination. 22.4 Unless otherwise agreed by the parties or directed by the arbitral tribunal, evidence of witnesses may be presented in the form of written statements signed by them. 22.5 In accordance with a schedule set by the arbitral tribunal, each party shall notify the arbitral tribunal and the other parties of the names of any witnesses who have presented a written witness statement whom it wishes to examine. 22.6 The arbitral tribunal may require any witness to appear at a hearing. If a witness whose appearance has been requested fails to appear without valid excuse as determined by the arbitral tribunal, the arbitral tribunal may disregard any written statement of that witness. 22.7 The arbitral tribunal may direct that witnesses be examined in person or by telephone or video conference. 22.8The arbitral tribunal may direct the order of proof, exclude irrelevant testimony or other evidence, and direct the parties to focus their presentations on issues whose resolution could dispose of all or part of the case. 22.9 Hearings shall not be held in public unless the parties agree otherwise or the governing law provides to the contrary. 22.10 If a party, duly notified in accordance with Article 22.1, fails to appear at a hearing without showing sufficient cause for such failure to the satisfaction of the arbitral tribunal, the arbitral tribunal may proceed with the hearing in the absence of such party. Article 25: Tribunal-appointed experts 25.1 The arbitral tribunal, after consultation with the parties, may appoint one or more independent experts to report to the arbitral tribunal, in writing, on issues designated by the arbitral tribunal and to be communicated to the parties. 25.2 The parties shall provide such expert with any relevant information or produce for inspection any relevant documents or goods that the expert may require. Any dispute between a party and the expert as to the relevance of the requested information or goods shall be referred to the arbitral tribunal for determination. 25.3 Upon receipt of an expert’s report, the arbitral tribunal shall send a copy of the report to all parties and shall give the parties an opportunity to express, in writing, their opinion of the report. A party may examine any document on which the expert has relied in such report. 25.4 At the request of any party, the arbitral tribunal shall give the parties an opportunity to question the expert at a hear
{"title":"Hearings,Witnesses and Tribunal-Appointed Experts","authors":"M. Willems","doi":"10.54648/bcdr2020002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/bcdr2020002","url":null,"abstract":"Article 22: Hearings and witnesses\u000022.1 The arbitral tribunal shall give the parties reasonable notice of the date, time and place of any oral hearing.\u000022.2 At least 15 days before the hearing, each party shall give the arbitral tribunal and the other parties the name and address of any witness it intends to present, the subject of the witness’s testimony and the language in which such witness will give his or her testimony. 22.3 The arbitral tribunal shall determine the manner in which witnesses are examined and who shall be present during witness examination.\u000022.4 Unless otherwise agreed by the parties or directed by the arbitral tribunal, evidence of witnesses may be presented in the form of written statements signed by them.\u000022.5 In accordance with a schedule set by the arbitral tribunal, each party shall notify the arbitral tribunal and the other parties of the names of any witnesses who have presented a written witness statement whom it wishes to examine.\u000022.6 The arbitral tribunal may require any witness to appear at a hearing. If a witness whose appearance has been requested fails to appear without valid excuse as determined by the arbitral tribunal, the arbitral tribunal may disregard any written statement of that witness.\u000022.7 The arbitral tribunal may direct that witnesses be examined in person or by telephone or video conference.\u000022.8The arbitral tribunal may direct the order of proof, exclude irrelevant testimony or other evidence, and direct the parties to focus their presentations on issues whose resolution could dispose of all or part of the case.\u000022.9 Hearings shall not be held in public unless the parties agree otherwise or the governing law provides to the contrary.\u000022.10 If a party, duly notified in accordance with Article 22.1, fails to appear at a hearing without showing sufficient cause for such failure to the satisfaction of the arbitral tribunal, the arbitral tribunal may proceed with the hearing in the absence of such party.\u0000Article 25: Tribunal-appointed experts\u000025.1 The arbitral tribunal, after consultation with the parties, may appoint one or more independent experts to report to the arbitral tribunal, in writing, on issues designated by the arbitral tribunal and to be communicated to the parties.\u000025.2 The parties shall provide such expert with any relevant information or produce for inspection any relevant documents or goods that the expert may require. Any dispute between a party and the expert as to the relevance of the requested information or goods shall be referred to the arbitral tribunal for determination.\u000025.3 Upon receipt of an expert’s report, the arbitral tribunal shall send a copy of the report to all parties and shall give the parties an opportunity to express, in writing, their opinion of the report. A party may examine any document on which the expert has relied in such report.\u000025.4 At the request of any party, the arbitral tribunal shall give the parties an opportunity to question the expert at a hear","PeriodicalId":166341,"journal":{"name":"BCDR International Arbitration Review","volume":"20 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114820688","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Article 34: Awards, orders, decisions and rulings 34.1 In addition to making a final award, the arbitral tribunal may make interim, interlocutory or partial awards, orders, decisions and rulings. 34.2 When there is more than one arbitrator, any award, order, decision or ruling of the arbitral tribunal shall be made unanimously or, failing unanimity, by a majority of the arbitrators. 34.3 When the parties or the arbitral tribunal so authorize, the presiding arbitrator alone may make orders, decisions or rulings on questions of procedure, including exchanges of information, subject to revision by the arbitral tribunal. Article 35: Time, form and effect of award 35.1 The arbitral tribunal shall deliberate and issue its final award as soon as possible after the close of proceedings, and, unless otherwise agreed by the parties or determined by the Chamber, the final award shall be made no later than 60 days from the date of the close of proceedings. 35.2 Awards shall be made in writing, and the arbitral tribunal shall state the reasons upon which an award is based, unless the parties have agreed in writing that no reasons need be given. 35.3 A monetary award shall be in the currency or currencies of the contract unless the arbitral tribunal considers another currency more appropriate. 35.4 An award shall be signed by the arbitral tribunal and shall state the date on which the award was made and the place of arbitration pursuant to Article 19.Where there is more than one arbitrator and any of them fails to sign an award, the award shall include a statement of the reasons for the absence of such signature. 35.5 Awards shall be final and binding on the parties, who shall carry out any award without delay and, absent written agreement otherwise, waive irrevocably their right to any form of appeal, review, or recourse to any court or other judicial authority, insofar as such waiver can validly be made. 35.6 The arbitral tribunal shall retain for each of its members one signed original of the award, and shall transmit to the Chamber as many signed originals as there are parties, plus one signed original for the Chamber, which shall communicate the award to the parties as soon as practicable. 35.7 If the applicable law requires an award to be filed or registered, the arbitral tribunal shall use its best endeavors to cause such requirement to be satisfied. It is the responsibility of the parties to bring such requirements or any other procedural requirements of the place of arbitration concerning an award to the attention of the arbitral tribunal. Article 37: Interpretation or correction of the award 37.1 Within 30 days after the receipt of an award, any party, with notice to all other parties and to the Chamber, may request the arbitral tribunal to interpret the award or correct any clerical, typographical or computational errors or make an additional award as to claims or counterclaims presented in the proceedings but omitted from the award. 37.2 If the arb
{"title":"Awards, Orders and Other Types of Decisions","authors":"R. Gerbay, A. Harris","doi":"10.54648/bcdr2020005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/bcdr2020005","url":null,"abstract":"Article 34: Awards, orders, decisions and rulings\u000034.1 In addition to making a final award, the arbitral tribunal may make interim, interlocutory or partial awards, orders, decisions and rulings.\u000034.2 When there is more than one arbitrator, any award, order, decision or ruling of the arbitral tribunal shall be made unanimously or, failing unanimity, by a majority of the arbitrators.\u000034.3 When the parties or the arbitral tribunal so authorize, the presiding arbitrator alone may make orders, decisions or rulings on questions of procedure, including exchanges of information, subject to revision by the arbitral tribunal. Article 35: Time, form and effect of award\u000035.1 The arbitral tribunal shall deliberate and issue its final award as soon as possible after the close of proceedings, and, unless otherwise agreed by the parties or determined by the Chamber, the final award shall be made no later than 60 days from the date of the close of proceedings.\u000035.2 Awards shall be made in writing, and the arbitral tribunal shall state the reasons upon which an award is based, unless the parties have agreed in writing that no reasons need be given.\u000035.3 A monetary award shall be in the currency or currencies of the contract unless the arbitral tribunal considers another currency more appropriate.\u000035.4 An award shall be signed by the arbitral tribunal and shall state the date on which the award was made and the place of arbitration pursuant to Article 19.Where there is more than one arbitrator and any of them fails to sign an award, the award shall include a statement of the reasons for the absence of such signature.\u000035.5 Awards shall be final and binding on the parties, who shall carry out any award without delay and, absent written agreement otherwise, waive irrevocably their right to any form of appeal, review, or recourse to any court or other judicial authority, insofar as such waiver can validly be made.\u000035.6 The arbitral tribunal shall retain for each of its members one signed original of the award, and shall transmit to the Chamber as many signed originals as there are parties, plus one signed original for the Chamber, which shall communicate the award to the parties as soon as practicable.\u000035.7 If the applicable law requires an award to be filed or registered, the arbitral tribunal shall use its best endeavors to cause such requirement to be satisfied. It is the responsibility of the parties to bring such requirements or any other procedural requirements of the place of arbitration concerning an award to the attention of the arbitral tribunal.\u0000Article 37: Interpretation or correction of the award\u000037.1 Within 30 days after the receipt of an award, any party, with notice to all other parties and to the Chamber, may request the arbitral tribunal to interpret the award or correct any clerical, typographical or computational errors or make an additional award as to claims or counterclaims presented in the proceedings but omitted from the award.\u000037.2 If the arb","PeriodicalId":166341,"journal":{"name":"BCDR International Arbitration Review","volume":"104 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123795975","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：