Upload
others
View
21
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Arbitrationin 49 jurisdictions worldwide
Contributing editors: Gerhard Wegen and Stephan Wilske2014
Published by Getting the Deal Through
in association with:Aarna Law
Anderson Mori & TomotsuneASAR – Al Ruwayeh & Partners
Association for International ArbitrationBaker & McKenzie Habib Al Mulla
Bán, S Szabó & PartnersBarbosa, Müssnich & Aragão
Barger Prekop sroBilliet & Co
Braddell Brothers LLPCairo Regional Centre for International Commercial Arbitration
Chinese European Arbitration Centre Chinese European Legal Association
Crowell & Moring LLPDorothy Ufot & Co
Dzungsrt & Associates LLCEsin Attorney Partnership
Fangda PartnersFangda Partners (in association with Peter Yuen & Associates)
Gan PartnershipGinestié Magellan Paley-Vincent in association with Ahdab Law Firm
Gleiss LutzHeussen Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft mbH
Hoet Pelaez Castillo & DuqueHughes Hubbard & Reed LLP
Johnson Winter & SlatteryKim & Chang
Kimathi & Partners, Corporate AttorneysKosheri, Rashed & Riad Law Firm
Łaszczuk & PartnersLawFed BRSA
Law Offices BelohlávekLilla, Huck, Otranto, Camargo Advogados
Mamic Peric Reberski RimacMcClure Naismith LLP
Meyer Fabre AvocatsMiranda Correia Amendoeira & Associados
Mkono & Co AdvocatesMotieka & Audzevicius
Niedermann RechtsanwälteNorton Rose Fulbright (Middle East) LLP
Oblin MelicharPérez Bustamante & Ponce
Pestalozzi Attorneys at Law LtdPosse Herrera Ruiz
Roosdiono & PartnersSandart & Partners
Schellenberg WittmerSherby & Co, AdvsStoica & Asociat
´ii
Stockholm Arbitration & Litigation Center (SALC) Advokatbyrå KBTilleke & Gibbins
Vasil Kisil & PartnersVon Wobeser y Sierra SC
www.gettingthedealthrough.com 1
contents
Arbitration 2014
contributing editors:Gerhard Wegen and stephan WilskeGleiss Lutz
Getting the Deal Through is delighted to publish the ninth edition of Arbitration, a volume in our series of annual reports, which provide international analysis in key areas of law and policy for corporate counsel, cross-border legal practitioners and business people.
Following the format adopted throughout the series, the same key questions are answered by leading practitioners in each of the 49 jurisdictions featured. New jurisdictions this year include Equatorial Guinea, Mexico, Nigeria and Scotland.
Every effort has been made to ensure that matters of concern to readers are covered. However, specific legal advice should always be sought from experienced local advisers. Getting the Deal Through publications are updated annually in print. Please ensure you are referring to the latest print edition or to the online version at www.gettingthedealthrough.com.
Getting the Deal Through gratefully acknowledges the efforts of all the contributors to this volume, who were chosen for their recognised expertise. We would also like to extend special thanks to contributing editors Gerhard Wegen and Stephan Wilske of Gleiss Lutz for their continued assistance with this volume.
Getting the Deal throughLondonJanuary 2014
PublisherGideon [email protected]
subscriptionsRachel [email protected]
Business development managers George [email protected]
Alan [email protected]
Published by Law Business Research Ltd87 Lancaster Road London, W11 1QQ, UKTel: +44 20 7908 1188Fax: +44 20 7229 6910© Law Business Research Ltd 2014No photocopying: copyright licences do not apply.First published 2006Ninth editionISSN 1750-9947
The information provided in this publication is general and may not apply in a specific situation. Legal advice should always be sought before taking any legal action based on the information provided. This information is not intended to create, nor does receipt of it constitute, a lawyer–client relationship. The publishers and authors accept no responsibility for any acts or omissions contained herein. Although the information provided is accurate as of January 2014, be advised that this is a developing area.
Printed and distributed by Encompass Print SolutionsTel: 0844 2480 112
Introduction 4
Gerhard Wegen and stephan Wilske Gleiss Lutz
CAM-CCBC 10
André de Albuquerque cavalcanti Abbud and Gustavo santos KuleszaBarbosa, Müssnich & Aragão
CEAC 16
eckart Brödermann and christine HeegChinese European Arbitration Centre
thomas Weimann Chinese European Legal Association
CIETAC 21
Peter Yuen, Helen shi and Benjamin Miao Fangda Partners
CMA 25
André de Albuquerque cavalcanti Abbud and Gustavo santos Kulesza Barbosa, Müssnich & Aragão
CRCICA 30
Mohamed Abdel Raouf Cairo Regional Centre for International Commercial Arbitration
DIAC 36
Gordon Blanke and soraya corm-Bakhos Baker & McKenzie Habib Al Mulla
DIS 39
Renate Dendorfer-Ditges Heussen Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft mbH
HKIAC 44
Peter Yuen and Doris Yeung Fangda Partners (in association with Peter Yuen & Associates)
ICC 48
José Rosell and María Beatriz Burghetto Hughes Hubbard & Reed LLP
ICSID 54
nicolas Herzog and niccolò Gozzi Niedermann Rechtsanwälte
The Polish Chamber of Commerce 60
Justyna szpara and Maciej Łaszczuk Łaszczuk & Partners
SCC 63
Dan engström & cornel Marian Stockholm Arbitration & Litigation Center (SALC) Advokatbyrå KB
The Swiss Chambers’ Arbitration Institution 67
Philippe Bärtsch, christopher Boog and Benjamin Moss Schellenberg Wittmer
Angola 72
Agostinho Pereira de Miranda, cláudia Leonardo and Jayr Fernandes Miranda Correia Amendoeira & Associados
Australia 79
tony Johnson and Henry Winter Johnson Winter & Slattery
Austria 87
Klaus oblin Oblin Melichar
Bahrain 94
Adam Vause Norton Rose Fulbright (Middle East) LLP
Belgium 102
Johan Billiet Billiet & Co
tatiana Proshkina Association for International Arbitration
Brazil 111
Hermes Marcelo Huck, Rogério carmona Bianco and Fábio Peixinho Gomes corrêa Lilla, Huck, Otranto, Camargo Advogados
contents
2 Getting the Deal through – Arbitration 2014
China 118
Peter Yuen, Helen shi and Benjamin Miao Fangda Partners
Colombia 127
carolina Posada Isaacs, María Alejandra Arboleda González and Diego Romero cruz Posse Herrera Ruiz
Croatia 134
natalija Peric and Frano BelohradskyMamic Peric Reberski Rimac
Czech Republic 141
Alexander J BelohlávekLaw Offices Belohlávek
Ecuador 149
Rodrigo Jijón Letort and Juan Manuel MarchánPérez Bustamante & Ponce
Egypt 158
tarek F Riad Kosheri, Rashed & Riad Law Firm
England and Wales 164
Jane Wessel, claire stockford and Meriam n Alrashid Crowell & Moring LLP
Equatorial Guinea 175
Agostinho Pereira de Miranda and cláudia Leonardo Miranda Correia Amendoeira & Associados
France 180
nathalie Meyer Fabre Meyer Fabre Avocats
Germany 189
stephan Wilske and claudia Krapfl Gleiss Lutz
Ghana 196
Kimathi Kuenyehia sr and Kafui Baeta Kimathi & Partners, Corporate Attorneys
Hong Kong 204
Peter Yuen and Doris Yeung Fangda Partners (in association with Peter Yuen & Associates)
Hungary 214
chrysta Bán Bán, S Szabó & Partners
India 222
Mysore Prasanna, shreyas Jayasimha, Rajashree Rastogi and s Bhushan Aarna Law
Indonesia 233
Anderonikus A s Janis Roosdiono & Partners
Israel 241
eric s sherby and tali Rosen Sherby & Co, Advs
Italy 250
Mauro Rubino-sammartano LawFed BRSA
Japan 258
shinji Kusakabe Anderson Mori & Tomotsune
JordanGinestié Magellan Paley-Vincent in association with Ahdab Law Firm see www.gettingthedealthrough.com
Korea 265
Bc Yoon, Richard Menard and Liz Kyo-Hwa chung Kim & Chang
Kuwait 274
Ahmed Barakat and Ibrahim sattout ASAR – Al Ruwayeh & Partners
LibyaGinestié Magellan Paley-Vincent in association with Ahdab Law Firm see www.gettingthedealthrough.com
Lithuania 282
Ramunas Audzevicius and Rimantas Daujotas Motieka & Audzevicius
Malaysia 289
Foo Joon Liang Gan Partnership
Mexico 299
claus von Wobeser and Montserrat ManzanoVon Wobeser y Sierra SC
Morocco Ginestié Magellan Paley-Vincent in association with Ahdab Law Firm see www.gettingthedealthrough.com
Mozambique 306
Agostinho Pereira de Miranda, Filipa Russo de sá and catarina carvalho cunhaMiranda Correia Amendoeira & Associados
Nigeria 313
Dorothy Udeme Ufot sAnDorothy Ufot & Co
Poland 323
Justyna szpara and Andrzej MaciejewskiŁaszczuk & Partners
Portugal 330
Agostinho Pereira de Miranda, cláudia Leonardo and catarina carvalho cunhaMiranda Correia Amendoeira & Associados
Qatar 337
Jalal el Ahdab and Myriam eid Ginestié Magellan Paley-Vincent in association with Ahdab Law Firm
Romania 346
cristiana-Irinel stoica, Daniel Aragea and Andrei Buga Stoica & Asociat
´ii
Saudi Arabia 353
Jalal el Ahdab and Myriam eidGinestié Magellan Paley-Vincent in association with Ahdab Law Firm
Scotland 363
Brandon Malone McClure Naismith LLP
Singapore 372
edmund Jerome Kronenburg and tan Kok Peng Braddell Brothers LLP
www.gettingthedealthrough.com 3
contents
Slovakia 382
Roman Prekop, Monika simorova and Peter Petho Barger Prekop sro
Sweden 391
eric M Runesson and simon Arvmyren Sandart & Partners
Switzerland 398
thomas Rohner and nadja Kubat erkPestalozzi Attorneys at Law Ltd
Tanzania 406
Wilbert Kapinga, ofotsu A tetteh-Kujorjie and Kamanga Kapinga Mkono & Co Advocates
Thailand 413
Kornkieat chunhakasikarn and John King Tilleke & Gibbins
Turkey 421
Ismail G esin, Dogan Gultutan and Ali Yesilirmak Esin Attorney Partnership
Ukraine 429
oleksiy Filatov and Pavlo Byelousov Vasil Kisil & Partners
United Arab Emirates 439
Gordon Blanke and soraya corm-Bakhos Baker & McKenzie Habib Al Mulla
United States 448
Birgit Kurtz, Arlen Pyenson and Amal Bouhabib Crowell & Moring LLP
Venezuela 455
José Gregorio torrealba Hoet Pelaez Castillo & Duque
Vietnam 463
nguyen Manh Dzung, Le Quang Hung and nguyen ngoc Minh Dzungsrt & Associates LLC
united StateS Crowell & Moring LLP
448 Getting the Deal Through – Arbitration 2014
United StatesBirgit Kurtz, Arlen Pyenson and Amal Bouhabib
Crowell & Moring LLP
Laws and institutions
1 Multilateral conventions relating to arbitrationIs your country a contracting state to the New York Convention on
the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards? Since
when has the Convention been in force? Were any declarations or
notifications made under articles I, X and XI of the Convention? What
other multilateral conventions relating to international commercial and
investment arbitration is your country a party to?
The United States are a contracting state to the following multilateral conventions:• TheConventionontheRecognitionandEnforcementofForeignArbitralAwards(NewYorkConvention),effective29December1970.TheNewYorkConventioniscodifiedintheFederalArbi-trationAct(FAA)at9USCsections201–208.TheUnitedStatesmadedeclarationsorothernotificationspursuanttoarticlesI(3)andX(1)asfollows:(a)ThisStatewillapplytheConventiononlytorecognitionandenforcementofawardsmadeintheter-ritoryofanothercontractingstate;and(b)ThisStatewillapplytheConventiononlytodifferencesarisingoutoflegalrelation-ships,whethercontractualornot,thatareconsideredcommer-cialunderthenationallaw.
• TheInter-AmericanConventiononInternationalCommercialArbitration(PanamaConvention),effective27October1990,andcodifiedintheFAAat9USCsections301–307.
• The Convention on the Settlement of Investment DisputesBetweenStatesandNationalsofOtherStates(ICSIDConven-tion),effective14October1966,andcodifiedinpartat22USCsection1650a.
2 Bilateral investment treatiesDo bilateral investment treaties exist with other countries?
The United States have entered into several bilateral investment trea-ties(BITs),alistofwhichcanbefoundonthewebsiteoftheUnitedStatesDepartmentofStateatwww.state.gov/s/l/treaty/tif/index.htm,whichlistsall‘treatiesinforce’(TIF)withtheUnitedStates.
3 Domestic arbitration lawWhat are the primary domestic sources of law relating to domestic
and foreign arbitral proceedings, and recognition and enforcement of
awards?
Theprimarydomesticsourcesarefoundinbothfederalandstatelaw,andinbothstatutesandjudge-madecaselaw.TheFAAgovernsthevalidityandenforceabilityofarbitrationagreementsinmaritimetransactions and in contracts ‘evidencing a transaction involv-ingcommerce’.MoststatesintheUnitedStateshavealsoenactedarbitration statutes that are based on the Uniform Arbitration Act
(UAA)ortheRevisedUniformArbitrationAct(RUAA),withsomevariations.Statestatutesmaycomplementandexpandonfederal arbitrationlaw,totheextentthattheydonotconflictwiththeFAA.Intheeventofaconflict,theFAApre-emptsstatestatutes.IntheUnitedStates,thereisastrongpolicyinfavourofarbitra-
tionandtheenforceabilityofarbitrationagreements.Chapter1oftheFAAgovernsdomesticarbitrationagreementsandawards,andappliestointernationalarbitrationtotheextentitdoesnotconflictwiththeNewYorkConvention.Chapters2and3oftheFAAgovernarbitrationsundertheNewYorkConventionandthePanamaCon-vention,respectively.FAAsections202and302defineaninterna-tionalagreementasanagreementarisingoutofalegalrelationship,whethercontractualornot,whichisconsideredascommercialandinvolvingatleastonenon-UScitizen,orifentirelybetweenUSciti-zens,onethatinvolvespropertylocatedabroad,envisagesperform-anceorenforcementabroad,or‘hassomeotherreasonablerelationwithoneormoreforeignstates’.
4 Domestic arbitration and UNCITRALIs your domestic arbitration law based on the UNCITRAL Model Law?
What are the major differences between your domestic arbitration law
and the UNCITRAL Model Law?
DisputesinvolvinginterstatecommercearegovernedbytheFAA,andtheFAAisnotbasedontheUNCITRALModelLawonInterna-tionalCommercialArbitration.Themajorityofstatearbitrationstat-utesarebasedontheUAAandtheRUAA,withsomestatestatutesalsobeingbasedontheUNCITRALModelLaw.UnderUSlaw,thequestionofarbitrabilitymayonlybereferredtothearbitraltribunalwhere there is clear and unmistakable evidence in the arbitration agreementthatthequestionofarbitrabilityshouldbedecidedbythearbitraltribunal.AnumberofinstitutionalarbitrationrulesarebasedontheUNCITRALModelLaw,orpermitthepartiestooptfortheapplicationoftheUNCITRALRulesintheirarbitration.
5 Mandatory provisionsWhat are the mandatory domestic arbitration law provisions on
procedure from which parties may not deviate?
UScourtshaveheldrepeatedlythat‘arbitrationisacreatureofcon-tract.’Asaresult,arbitraltribunalsareboundbytheparties’agree-ment.Byreferenceinthearbitrationagreement,thetribunalmayalsobeboundbyinstitutionalrulesconcerningprocedure.UndertheFAA,courtscanvacatearbitrationawardsonlyonverylimitedproceduralgrounds,includingarbitratormisconductorpartiality,refusaltohearmaterialevidence,andwherethearbitratorshaveactedultravires.
© Law Business Research Ltd 2014
www.gettingthedealthrough.com 449
Crowell & Moring LLP united StateS
6 Substantive lawIs there any rule in your domestic arbitration law that provides the
arbitral tribunal with guidance as to which substantive law to apply to
the merits of the dispute?
Asageneralrule,theparties’choiceofsubstantivelawisenforce-ableandbinding,andarbitraltribunalsmustgenerallyapplythesubstantivelawchosenbythepartiestogoverntheirdispute.InsomestatesintheUnitedStates,choiceoflawprovisionsaresubjecttotherequirementthatthechosenjurisdictionhaveasubstantialrelation-shiptothepartiesortheunderlyingtransaction,orthatthepartieshaveareasonablebasisintheirchoiceoflaw.Ifthearbitratorsdonotapplythesubstantivelawselectedbythepartiesinthearbitra-tionagreement,thearbitralawardmaybevacatedonthegroundsthatthearbitratorsmanifestlydisregardedthelaworthattheyactedultravires.
7 Arbitral institutionsWhat are the most prominent arbitral institutions situated in your
country?
The most prominent arbitral institutions in the United States are:
American Arbitration Association (AAA)1622AvenueoftheAmericasNewYork,NY10019United Stateswww.adr.org
International Centre for Dispute Resolution (ICDR)120Broadway,21stFloorNewYork,NY10271United Stateswww.icdr.org
Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services (JAMS)620EighthAvenue,34thFloorNewYork,NY10018United Stateswww.jamsadr.com
International Institute for Conflict Prevention and Resolution (CPR)575LexingtonAvenue,21stFloorNewYork,NY10022United Stateswww.cpradr.org
ICC International Court of Arbitration (SICANA)1212AvenueoftheAmericas,9thFloorNewYork,NY10036United Stateswww.iccwbo.org
Arbitration agreement
8 ArbitrabilityAre there any types of disputes that are not arbitrable?
Anydisputeofacivil/commercialnaturebetweenprivatepersonsorentitiescanbearbitrated.
9 RequirementsWhat formal and other requirements exist for an arbitration
agreement?
CourtsintheUnitedStateshaveconfirmedrepeatedlythatarbitra-tionisa‘creatureofcontract.’Arbitrationagreementsare,therefore,
subjecttothegeneralrequirementsconcerningtheformation,validityandenforceabilityofcontracts.Statutesgoverningtheenforcementofarbitrationagreementsgenerallyrequirethatanarbitrationagree-ment be in writing and valid under the laws of the state governing thearbitrationagreement.TheFAApre-emptsstatelawsrestrictingtheformationorvalidityofarbitrationagreements.
10 EnforceabilityIn what circumstances is an arbitration agreement no longer
enforceable?
UndertheFAA(section2),arbitrationagreementsarevalid,irrevo-cableandenforceableunlessgrounds‘existatlaworinequityfortherevocationofanycontract.’Thus,generalprinciplesofcontractlawapplyforchallenginganarbitrationagreement,whichincludestandardgroundssuchasduress,fraudulentinducement,fraud,ille-gality,lackofcapacity,unconscionabilityandwaiver.
11 Third parties – bound by arbitration agreementIn which instances can third parties or non-signatories be bound by an
arbitration agreement?
Arbitrationagreementsgenerallybindonlythecontractingparties.Inlimitedcircumstances,thirdpartiesandnon-signatoriescanbeboundbyarbitrationagreements(orbeabletoenforcearbitrationagreements)throughtraditionalprinciplesofstatecontractlawsuchasassumption,piercingthecorporateveil,alterego,incorporationbyreference,third-partybeneficiary,waiverandestoppel.
12 Third parties – participationDoes your domestic arbitration law make any provisions with respect
to third-party participation in arbitration, such as joinder or third-party
notice?
Ifnon-signatoriesparticipateinanarbitration,theyaregenerallysubjecttothesamerulesandproceduresassignatories.
13 Groups of companiesDo courts and arbitral tribunals in your jurisdiction extend an
arbitration agreement to non-signatory parent or subsidiary companies
of a signatory company, provided that the non-signatory was somehow
involved in the conclusion, performance or termination of the contract
in dispute, under the ‘group of companies’ doctrine?
The‘groupofcompanies’doctrineisnotgenerallyrecognisedintheUnitedStates.Whilenon-signatoriestypicallyarenotboundbyarbi-trationagreements,parentandsubsidiarycompaniesmaybecom-pelled to arbitrate in cases in which the claims against them are based onthesamefactsas,andareinherentlyinseparablefrom,theclaimsagainstthesignatorycompany.Non-signatoryparentandsubsidiarycompaniesmayalsobecompelledtoarbitratebasedonstatelawtheoriesofalterego,veil-piercingandagency.
14 Multiparty arbitration agreementsWhat are the requirements for a valid multiparty arbitration
agreement?
Foramultipartyarbitrationagreementtobevalid,itmustcomplywithgeneralcontractlawrequirements;forexample,itshouldbein writing and demonstrate the intent of the parties to be bound bytheagreement.Theconsolidationofmultiplearbitrationsintoasinglearbitrationwillinmostcasesnotbepermittedunlessexpresslyauthorisedbyalltheparties.Classarbitrationwillbepermittedonlywherethereisacontractual
basis for concluding that the parties agreed to authorise such a proceed-ing (Stolt-Nielsen SA v AnimalFeeds Int’l Corp,559US662(2010)).
© Law Business Research Ltd 2014
united StateS Crowell & Moring LLP
450 Getting the Deal Through – Arbitration 2014
Butiftheagreementissilentandthequestionofclassarbitrabilityisdeferredtothearbitraltribunal,acourtmustdefertothearbitrator’scontractualinterpretation,aslongasthearbitrator‘arguablycon-strued’ the agreement (Oxford Health Plans LLC v Sutter,133SCt2064(2013)).Courtsmustrigorouslyenforcearbitrationagreementsaccordingtotheirterms,includingthosethatcontainclassactionwaivers,evenwherethecostofpursuinganindividualclaimwouldbe prohibitive (American Express Co v Italian Colors Restaurants,133SCt2304(2013)).
Constitution of arbitral tribunal
15 Eligibility of arbitratorsAre there any restrictions as to who may act as an arbitrator? Would
any contractually stipulated requirement for arbitrators based on
nationality, religion or gender be recognised by the courts in your
jurisdiction?
Thepartiestoanarbitrationagreementmayrestrictwhomayactasanarbitratorinadispute,forexample,bysettingforthcertainchar-acteristicsthatarbitratorsmusthave.Inaddition,codesofjudicialconducttypicallyprohibitanactivejudgefromactingasanarbitra-tor,andapartytoanarbitrationisalsotypicallynotpermittedtoserveasanarbitratorinthatarbitration.TheFAAdoesnotaddresstheappointmentofarbitratorsonthebasisofnationality,religionorgender.Incasesinwhichthepartiesarefromdifferentcountries,theAAACommercialRules(R-15)providethattheAAA,onitsowninitiativeorattherequestofaparty,mayappointasanarbitratoranationalofacountryotherthanthatofanyoftheparties.
16 Default appointment of arbitratorsFailing prior agreement of the parties, what is the default mechanism
for the appointment of arbitrators?
FAAsection5providesfortheappointmentofarbitratorsbycourtsif the parties have failed to provide a method for their selection or havefailedtoavailthemselvesofsuchamethod.Severalinstitutionalrulesalsoprovidefortheappointmentofarbitratorsinsuchcases.
17 Challenge and replacement of arbitrators On what grounds and how can an arbitrator be challenged and
replaced? Please discuss in particular the grounds for challenge and
replacement, and the procedure, including challenge in court. Is there
a tendency to apply or seek guidance from the IBA Guidelines on
Conflicts of Interest in International Arbitration?
InaUS-seatedarbitration,pursuanttotheFAA(section10),apartyseekingtochallengeanarbitratorinUScourtscandosoonlyafterthefinalarbitrationawardhasbeenissued,inthecourseofseekingtovacateanawardbasedonarbitratorpartiality.TheFAAprovidesnobasisforanarbitratorchallengeasaformofinterlocutoryrelief.Institutionalrulesgenerallyprovideforthechallengeandreplace-
mentofarbitratorsonsuchgroundsaspartialityorbias,incapacity,failuretoparticipateintheproceedings,failuretomeetthequali-ficationsagreedonbytheparties,anddeath.Adeterminationofarbitratorpartialityorbiasisafact-specificinquiryandcanincludescenarios such as an arbitrator with a financial interest in the case or aparty,undisclosedbusinessorpersonalrelationshipswithaparty,andarefusaltoadmitevidence.Institutionalrulesprovidethespecificprocedurestobefollowed,
including deadlines for raising a challenge and the procedure for installinga replacementarbitrator.Failure to followthe specificrulesrelatingtoanarbitratorchallengemayresultinwaiverofthatchallenge.SomearbitrationinstitutionstaketheIBAGuidelinesonCon-
flicts of Interest in International Arbitration into consideration when
decidingarbitratorchallenges;partiestoanarbitrationcanalsoagreetofollowtheIBAGuidelines.
18 Relationship between parties and arbitratorsWhat is the relationship between parties and arbitrators? Please
elaborate on the contractual relationship between parties and
arbitrators, neutrality of party-appointed arbitrators, remuneration, and
expenses of arbitrators.
Asnotedabove,arbitratorscanbechallengedandreplacedbasedonpartiality,andtheFAA(section10)allowsforvacaturofanawardwhereanarbitratorexhibitedpartiality.Institutionalrulesgenerallyrequirearbitratorcandidatestodisclosefactsthatmaysuggestpar-tialityorlackofindependencefromtheparties.Althoughpartiesmaygenerallyagreeonthearbitratorappoint-
mentprocess,whichmayincludeparty-appointedarbitrators,evenparty-appointedarbitratorsmustremainneutral.Forexample,botharticle11.1oftheICCArbitrationRulesandarticle7oftheAAA/ICDR’sInternationalArbitrationRulesrequirethatarbitratorsbeimpartialandindependent.The2004revisiontotheAAA/ABACodeofEthicsforArbitratorsinCommercialDisputesmakesclearthattheneutralityrequirementextendstoallarbitrators,includingparty-appointedarbitrators,unlesspartieshaveagreedotherwise.Compensationofarbitratorsvariesdependingontheinstitutional
rules.Forexample,undertheAAACommercialArbitrationRulesandtheAAA/ICDR’sInternationalArbitrationRules,anarbitrator’scompensation is based on the arbitrator’s stated rate of compensa-tion.TheICCArbitrationRules,ontheotherhand,provideforafeeschedulesetbytheICCCourt.
19 Immunity of arbitrators from liabilityTo what extent are arbitrators immune from liability for their conduct in
the course of the arbitration?
Article35oftheAAA/ICDRInternationalArbitrationRulespro-videsthatarbitratorsareimmunefromliabilityexceptforinten-tionalwrongdoing.TheAAACommercialArbitrationRulesandtheUNCITRALRules(revisedin2010)containsimilarlanguage.TheICCArbitrationRules(article40),ontheotherhand,provideimmu-nityfromliabilitywithnoexceptionfordeliberatewrongdoing.IntheUS,stateorfederallawultimatelycontrolarbitratorimmu-
nityfromliability,andbecausearbitratorsassumeaquasi-judicialrole,theyaregenerallyaffordedimmunitybyUScourts.
Jurisdiction and competence of arbitral tribunal
20 Court proceedings contrary to arbitration agreementsWhat is the procedure for disputes over jurisdiction if court
proceedings are initiated despite an existing arbitration agreement,
and what time limits exist for jurisdictional objections?
Section3oftheFAAprovidesthatasuitbroughtinfederalcourtwillbestayed,uponapplicationbyaparty,ifthecaseissubjecttoavalid,writtenarbitrationagreementbetweentheparties.Ifthepartiesdisputetheexistenceofavalid,writtenarbitration
agreement,section4oftheFAAprovidesthatafederalcourtmayholdahearingand,ifthecourtfindsthatavalid,writtenarbitrationagreementexists,itwillorderthepartiestoproceedwiththearbitra-tion.Iftheexistenceofthearbitrationagreementisinissue,thecourtwillconductatrial.TheFAArequiresthatapartyseekingarbitrationprovidetheotherpartywithfivedays’noticeofitsintenttopetitionthecourtforanorderdirectingarbitration.
© Law Business Research Ltd 2014
www.gettingthedealthrough.com 451
Crowell & Moring LLP united StateS
21 Jurisdiction of arbitral tribunalWhat is the procedure for disputes over jurisdiction of the arbitral
tribunal once arbitral proceedings have been initiated and what time
limits exist for jurisdictional objections?
The ‘competence-competence’ principle refers to the concept that a tribunal is competent to decide on its own competence to hear adispute.Internationalarbitraltribunalsaregenerallypresumedtohavethispowertodecideontheirownjurisdiction.Indeed,themajorarbitralinstitutionalrulesinclude‘competence-competence’relatedprovisions.Parties thathaveeitheragreed inthearbitra-tionagreementtoreferjurisdictionalquestionstothetribunal,orwho have adopted institutional rules that include a ‘competence- competence’provisionwithintheirarbitrationagreements,aregener-allypresumedtohaveagreedtoconferonthetribunalthepowertodetermineitsownjurisdiction.AlthoughtheFAAdoesnotexpresslyaddressthe‘competence-
competence’principle,UScourtshaveacknowledgedthatarbitraltribunalshavethepowertodeterminetheirownjurisdiction(eg,Howsam v Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc,537US79(2002)).TheAAA/ICDR InternationalArbitrationRules (article 15)
requirethatjurisdictionalchallengesbemadenolaterthanthetimeofsubmittingthestatementofdefence(within30daysafter thearbitrationiscommenced);otherwise,jurisdictionalchallengesarewaived.
Arbitral proceedings
22 Place and language of arbitrationFailing prior agreement of the parties, what is the default mechanism
for the place of arbitration and the language of the arbitral
proceedings?
If the parties have not identified the place of arbitration in the arbitra-tionagreement,andotherwiseareunabletocometoanagreement,most institutional arbitral rules provide that either the administrator orthetribunalwilldeterminetheplace,or‘seat’ofthearbitration,typicallyconsideringissuessuchasthenationalityofthepartiesandarbitratorsandtheapplicablelaw.UndertheFAA(section4),UScourts,whenissuingorderscom-
pellingarbitration,havethepowertospecifytheparticularplacethearbitrationistoproceed.UScourtshave,insomecases,doneso even where the parties agreed to institutional rules that provided foranalternateseatselectionprocedure(eg,Tolaram Fibers, Inc v Deutsche Eng’g Der Voest-Alpine Industrieanlagenbau GmbH,No.2:91CV00025,1991WL41772(MDNC,26February1991)).Ifthepartieshavenotagreedonthelanguageofthearbitration,
most institutional rules empower the tribunal to select the language ofthearbitration,whichwilloftenlooktothelanguageoftheunder-lyingcontract.
23 Commencement of arbitrationHow are arbitral proceedings initiated?
Arbitration agreements sometimes include requirements relating to commencinganarbitration,suchasnoticerequirementsorarequire-mentofnegotiationormediationbeforecommencingarbitration.Institutional arbitral rules contain the specific requirements for a noticeofarbitration(alsocalledarequestordemandforarbitration),includingcontentrequirementsaswellasfeerequirements.Ingen-eral,thenoticeofarbitrationmustbeprovidedtotherespondent.
24 HearingIs a hearing required and what rules apply?
Mostinstitutionalarbitralrulesprovideforahearing,inkeepingwith the general proposition that the parties have the right to be heardandtopresenttheircase.AlthoughtheFAAdoesnotexpressly
requireahearing,UScourtshavevacatedawardsundertheNewYorkConventionbasedonafailuretoallowpartiestobeheard(eg,Parsons & Whittemore Overseas Co Inc v Societe Generale de l’Industrie du Papier (RAKTA),508F2d969(2dCir1974)).
25 EvidenceBy what rules is the arbitral tribunal bound in establishing the facts of
the case? What types of evidence are admitted and how is the taking
of evidence conducted?
Institutionalrulesgenerallyprovidearbitraltribunalswithbroaddiscretionoverthearbitralprocedure,inparticularrelatingtotheadmissibility andweight of evidence. Arbitral tribunals do notgenerallyapplyrulesofevidencethataretypicalinUSlitigation,suchastheFederalRulesofEvidenceortheFederalRulesofCivilProcedure.Theexchangeofdocuments(sometimesreferredtoas‘discovery’
or‘disclosure’)isavailableinarbitration,albeitinamuchmorelim-itedscopethaninUSlitigation.Tribunalsoftenapply,oratminimumseekguidancefrom,theIBARulesontheTakingofEvidenceinInternationalArbitration.Most institutional rules allow forbothparty-appointedand
tribunal-appointedexperts.Mostinstitutionalrulesrequirepartiestosubmitwrittenwitness
statements,oratminimumidentifytheirwitnessesandtheirantici-patedtestimonysubjectareas,inadvanceoftheevidentiaryhearing,soastoavoid‘surprise’testimony.
26 Court involvementIn what instances can the arbitral tribunal request assistance from a
court and in what instances may courts intervene?
Section7oftheFAAprovidesanarbitraltribunalwiththepower,inparticularcircumstances,toordertestimonyanddocumentproduc-tion,and,ifthetribunal’sordersaredisregarded,thetribunalmayseekjudicialassistancetocompeldiscovery.Section7alsoallowspartiestoanarbitrationtomakesucharequestforjudicialassistanceintakingevidence.SomeUSstatelaws(forexample,theNewYorkCivilPractice
LawandRules,CPLR)alsoprovidetribunalsorpartieswiththepowertoissuesubpoenasfordocumentsortestimonyinarbitrations,whichwouldthenbeenforceableincourt.
27 ConfidentialityIs confidentiality ensured?
TheFAAdoesnotprovideforconfidentialityofarbitralproceedingsorofawards.Manyinstitutionalrulescontainconfidentialityprovi-sions,withdifferingscopes.TheIBARulesontheTakingofEvidencealsocontainalimitedconfidentialityprovision.Toensureconfidenti-ality,partiesshouldincludeconfidentialityrequirementswithintheirarbitrationagreements,selectinstitutionalrulesthatincludesatis-factoryconfidentialityprovisions,oradoptamorespecific,tailoredconfidentialityagreementatthestartofthearbitration.
Interim measures and sanctioning powers
28 Interim measures by the courtsWhat interim measures may be ordered by courts before and after
arbitration proceedings have been initiated?
Although section8of theFAAgives courts thepower toorderinterimmeasuresonlyinanarrowcategoryofadmiraltyormari-timedisputes,UScourtshavefoundthattheyhavethepowertoorderinterimmeasures(eg,Teradyne, Inc v Mostek Corp,797F2d43,51(1stCir1986)).Interimmeasurescanincludeinjunctions,
© Law Business Research Ltd 2014
united StateS Crowell & Moring LLP
452 Getting the Deal Through – Arbitration 2014
temporaryrestrainingordersorordersdirectingthetakingofevi-denceorpreservationofevidenceorassets.Someinstitutionalrulesalsoprovidethatcourtsmayentertain
requestsforinterimmeasures,althoughsomerulessuggestthatsuchrequestsshouldbemadebeforethetribunalisempanelled,andthatanyrequestsforprovisionalmeasuresfollowingthetribunal’sforma-tionshouldbehandledbythetribunal.Thepartiescanalsoagreethattheywillnotseekinterimmeasuresfromthecourts.
29 Interim measures by an emergency arbitrator Does your domestic arbitration law or do the rules of the domestic
arbitration institutions mentioned above provide for an emergency
arbitrator prior to the constitution of the arbitral tribunal?
TheFAAdoesnotprovideforanemergencyarbitrator.Someinstitu-tionalrules,suchastheAAA/ICDRInternationalArbitrationRules(article37)andtheICCArbitrationRules(AppendixV),doprovideforanemergencyarbitratorbeforetheconstitutionofthearbitraltribunal.
30 Interim measures by the arbitral tribunalWhat interim measures may the arbitral tribunal order after it is
constituted? In which instances can security for costs be ordered by
an arbitral tribunal?
Manyinstitutionalrulesprovidethearbitraltribunalwiththepowertoorder interimmeasures, oftenwithbroaddiscretion. Interimmeasurescanincludeinjunctions,temporaryrestrainingorders,ororders directing the taking of evidence or preservation of evidence orassets.Manyinstitutionalrulesalsoprovideforsecurityforcostsasaninterimmeasure.
31 Sanctioning powers of the arbitral tribunalPursuant to your domestic arbitration law or the rules of the domestic
arbitration institutions mentioned above, is the arbitral tribunal
competent to order sanctions against parties or their counsel who use
‘guerrilla tactics’ in arbitration?
TheAAACommercialArbitrationRules(R-58)providethetribunalwiththepowertosanctionaparty,uponaparty’srequest,forfailuretocomplywithitsobligationsundertherulesorwithanorderofthetribunal.Evenwhereinstitutionalrulesdonotprovideexpresssanctions
provisions,mostarbitralinstitutionalrulesprovidethetribunalwithbroaddiscretiontoapportionthecostsofthearbitration.Althoughtheserulesdonotincludesanctioningpowerperse,thisbroaddiscre-tion empowers the tribunal to take the parties’ conduct into account inthecourseofapportioningcosts.The2012ICCRulesincludean update that empowers the tribunal to apportion costs based on ‘theextenttowhicheachpartyhasconductedthearbitrationinanexpeditiousandcost-effectivemanner’.
Awards
32 Decisions by the arbitral tribunalFailing party agreement, is it sufficient if decisions by the arbitral
tribunal are made by a majority of all its members or is a unanimous
vote required? What are the consequences for the award if an
arbitrator dissents?
TheFAAdoesnotstatewhetheramajorityorunanimityof thetribunalmustrendertheaward.Mostinstitutionalrulesrequireamajorityawardand,insomecases,requirethattherebeawrittenstatementexplainingwhyanyarbitratorfailedtosigntheaward.Adissentingopinionbyanarbitratordoesnotformpartoftheawardandhasnoimpactontheenforceabilityoftheaward.
33 Dissenting opinionsHow does your domestic arbitration law deal with dissenting opinions?
Unlessthepartieshaveotherwiseagreed,adissentingopinionshouldnotaffecttheenforceabilityofanaward.
34 Form and content requirementsWhat form and content requirements exist for an award?
A US court will enforce an award that is rendered in compliance withtheparties’agreement,theapplicablerulesorthelawofthestatewhereitwasawarded.TheFAA(section10(a)(4))requiresthat arbitralawardsbe‘mutual,final,anddefinite,’butdoesnotexpresslyimposeanyformalrequirements.Generally,UScourtswillrequireanawardtobeinwritingandsignedorotherwiseauthenticated.Insti-tutionalrulesmayimposefurtherrequirements,forexamplethattheawardincludethedateandplacewheretheawardwasmade.
35 Time limit for awardDoes the award have to be rendered within a certain time limit under
your domestic arbitration law or under the rules of the domestic
arbitration institutions mentioned above?
TheFAAdoesnotsetatimelimitforrenderinganaward.UndertheRUAAandUAA,thepartiesmayagreetoadeadlinefortheaward,otherwisethecourtmayorderatime.TheAAACommercialRules(R-45)instructthearbitratortoissuetheaward‘promptly’and,unlessotherwiseagreedbythepartiesorspecifiedbylaw,nolaterthan30daysfromthedateofclosingofthefinalhearingoroftheAAA’stransmittalofthefinalstatementsandproofstothearbitrator,iforalhearingshavebeenwaived.
36 Date of awardFor what time limits is the date of the award decisive and for what
time limits is the date of delivery of the award decisive?
Thedateofanawardtriggerstimelimitsrelatedtoconfirmation,modification,correctionorvacaturofanaward.UndertheFAA,apartymustapplytoconfirmadomesticarbitralawardwithinoneyearandaforeignarbitralawardwithinthreeyearsofthedateoftheaward.TheRUAAandUAAdonotimposeatimelimitforcon-firminganaward,butprovidethatamotionto‘change’orclarifyanawardmustbemadewithin20daysofthedateoftheaward,andamotiontomodifyorvacatemustbemadewithin90days.Likewise,undertheAAACommercialRules(R-50),apartymustfileamotiontomodifytheawardwithin20daysofitstransmittal.
37 Types of awardsWhat types of awards are possible and what types of relief may the
arbitral tribunal grant?
Subjecttotheparties’agreement,arbitratorsaregenerallyfreetoissueanytypeofreliefconsistentwiththelawandcircumstancesofthecase,includingdamages,injunctions,specificperformance,punitiveorexemplarydamages,interest,costsandattorneys’fees.TheRUAAandUAAallowanarbitratorto‘orderanyremediesthearbitratorconsidersjustandappropriateunderthecircumstancesofthearbitrationproceeding,’regardlessifsucharemedywouldbegrantedbyanenforcingcourt.Similarly,theAAACommercialRules(R-47)permittribunalstograntanyreliefdeemed‘justandequitable’withinthescopeoftheparties’agreement.
38 Termination of proceedingsBy what other means than an award can proceedings be terminated?
Anarbitrationmayterminateattherequestofthepartiesoriftheparties have reached a settlement.TheAAACommercialRules
© Law Business Research Ltd 2014
www.gettingthedealthrough.com 453
Crowell & Moring LLP united StateS
(R-57(f),FlexibleFeeSchedule)alsoallowforterminationoftheproceedings if the parties fail to make full deposits or an annual abeyancefeeifthepartieshaveagreedtostaytheproceedings.Ifa federal or state court finds that the agreement to arbitrate is not valid,itmayorderarbitrationproceedingstobeterminated.TheAAA/ICDRInternationalArbitrationRules(article29(2))furtherprovidethatatribunalmayterminateproceedingsiftheybecome‘unnecessaryorimpossible’.
39 Cost allocation and recoveryHow are the costs of the arbitral proceedings allocated in awards?
TheFAAissilentontheallocationofcostsandfees.UnderUSprac-tice,partiestraditionallybeartheirowncostsandfees.Institutionalrulesoftenallowatribunaltoawardreasonableattorneys’feesandotherreasonableexpensesasappropriateorpursuanttoagreementbytheparties.TheAAACommercialRulesincludedetailedadmin-istrative fee schedules and allow the AAA to assess additional fees whennecessary.
40 InterestMay interest be awarded for principal claims and for costs and at what
rate?
Whetherinterestispermittedinanawardwillvary,dependingonstatestatutes,institutionalrulesandanyagreementoftheparties.TheAAA/ICDRInternationalArbitrationRules(article28)expresslyallowthetribunaltoawardpre-awardandpost-awardinterest,sim-pleorcompound,asitconsidersappropriate,takingintoconsidera-tionthecontractandapplicablelaw.Likewise,theAAACommercialRules(R-47(d)(i))permittheinclusionofinterestintheaward. Proceedings subsequent to issuance of award
41 Interpretation and correction of awardsDoes the arbitral tribunal have the power to correct or interpret an
award on its own or at the parties’ initiative? What time limits apply?
Ingeneral,itisuptothepartiestorequestmodification,correctionorinterpretationoftheaward.TheRUAAandUAAprovidethatapartymaymovetomodifyorcorrectanawardwithin20daysof
Enforcement of ICSID awardsTwo recent federal court decisions upheld ICSID awards against sovereign attempts to resist enforcement, reflecting the US judiciary’s resolve to promote the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments in the US. In Duke Energy Int’l v Republic of Peru, 904 F Supp 2d 131 (DDC 2012), the DC District Court rebuffed Peru’s attempt to avoid payment under an ICSID award not once but twice. And in Blue Ridge Investments, LLC v Republic of Argentina, 902 F Supp 2d 367 (SDNY 2012), the Southern District of New York likewise rejected Argentina’s defences to confirmation of an ICSID award. The Second Circuit upheld the district court’s decision in Blue Ridge, finding that ‘Argentina waived its sovereign immunity by becoming a party to the ICSID Convention’ (Blue Ridge Investments, LLC v Republic of Argentina, 735 F3d 72, 84 (2d Cir 2013)).
Although Argentina and Peru challenged their respective awards on different grounds, the federal courts’ decisions to confirm the awards over the states’ objections illustrate a continuing deference to arbitration and to the statutes compelling their enforcement. In Duke, the DC District Court emphasised that judicial review of arbitration awards is ‘limited by design’, and that, so long as the award was ‘sufficiently clear,’ the court was ‘required by statute to give the Award full faith and credit and confirm it accordingly’ (Duke, 904 F Supp 2d at 132-33). Similarly, the Southern District of New York found that, by consenting to arbitrate before ICSID, Argentina was subject to the ‘automatic recognition and enforcement’ of its award in signatory states like the US (Blue Ridge, 902 F Supp 2d at 374).
While limited to the enforcement of ICSID awards (which are subject to a different statute from other foreign arbitration awards), these two cases stand as important precedents in upholding the binding force of foreign awards.
New AAA appeals procedureAlthough arbitration has typically been viewed as a faster, more efficient, and final form of dispute resolution, the AAA enacted its Optional Appellate Arbitration Rules in November 2013, an optional appeals procedure within the arbitration process itself. For a party to appeal under these new rules, the parties must have agreed to adopt these appellate rules. Parties may agree to the AAA Optional Appellate Arbitration Rules even if the underlying arbitration was not conducted pursuant to the AAA or ICDR’s institutional rules.
The new rules provide for an appellate arbitral tribunal that reviews arbitral awards for errors of law that are material and prejudicial, and for determinations of fact that are clearly erroneous. Under the rules, the appeals process takes approximately three months, and the appeal tribunal’s decision becomes the final award. Although it remains to be seen how frequently this appeals process is utilised, it may be especially attractive for parties to complex cases, that, without the opportunity to appeal an arbitral award, may otherwise choose to litigate disputes within the US court system, which includes the right to appeal.
Update and trends
Birgit Kurtz [email protected] Arlen Pyenson [email protected] Amal Bouhabib [email protected]
590 Madison Avenue Tel: +1 212 223 4000
New York, NY 10022 Fax: +1 212 223 4134
United States www.crowell.com
© Law Business Research Ltd 2014
united StateS Crowell & Moring LLP
454 Getting the Deal Through – Arbitration 2014
receivingnoticeoftheaward.UndertheAAA/ICDRInternationalArbitrationRules(article37(6)),atribunalmaymodify,correctorvacateaninterimawardissuedbyanemergencyarbitrator,butanyotherrequesttomodifyorinterpretanawardmustbemadebyoneoftheparties.TheFAA(section11)allowsafederalcourttomodifyorcorrectanawarduponrequest.
42 Challenge of awardsHow and on what grounds can awards be challenged and set aside?
Apartymaymovetovacateadomesticawardwithinthreemonthsofthefilingordeliveryoftheaward.Thegroundsonwhichanawardmaybesetasideare,however,limitedindeferencetothearbi-trationprocess.UndertheFAAandUAA,awardsmaybevacatedintheeventoffraudorcorruption,evidentpartialitybythearbitra-tors,arbitratormisconductorrefusaltohearmaterialevidence,dueprocessconcerns,orwherethearbitratorsexceededthescopeoftheirpowersorfailedtomakeamutual,finalanddefiniteaward.Interna-tionalarbitrationawardsmaybesetasideonthegroundscontainedineithertheNewYorkorPanamaConventions,or,inthecaseofanICSIDaward,pursuanttotheICSIDConvention.
43 Levels of appealHow many levels of appeal are there? How long does it generally take
until a challenge is decided at each level? Approximately what costs
are incurred at each level? How are costs apportioned among the
parties?
Generally,arbitrationawardsarefinalandnotappealable,eithertoUScourtsorwithinthearbitrationprocessitself.Somearbitralinstitutionshaverecentlydraftedrulesallowingforlimitedappealswithinthearbitration,asdiscussedfurtherin‘Updateandtrends.’PartiesmayappealfromUScourtordersrelatingtoconfirmationorvacaturofanawardthroughnormallitigationprocedures;thisprocessisgenerallylengthyandquitecostly.
44 Recognition and enforcementWhat requirements exist for recognition and enforcement of domestic
and foreign awards, what grounds exist for refusing recognition and
enforcement, and what is the procedure?
Eitherpartymaymoveto‘confirm’anawardaccordingtotheappli-cableproceduressetforthinthecourtthathasjurisdiction,usuallybymotionorpetition.Underbothfederalandstatelaw,confirmationisintendedtobeasummaryproceeding,andthecourtisexpectedto
converttheawardintoajudgmentalmostautomatically.Althoughapartymayobjecttoconfirmation,thecourtislimitedinitsabilitytoreviewanawardandmaynotsecond-guessatribunal.UndertheFAA(section9),anawardmustbeconfirmedunlessitisvacated,modifiedorcorrected.
45 Enforcement of foreign awardsWhat is the attitude of domestic courts to the enforcement of foreign
awards set aside by the courts at the place of arbitration?
UScourtsmaygivedeferencetoaforeignjudgmentannullinganawardintheplaceofarbitrationsolongasthatjudgmentdoesnotviolateUSdueprocessrequirements.Ingeneral,UScourtsconsiderthecourtattheplaceofarbitrationtohave‘primary’jurisdictionovertheaward.
46 Cost of enforcementWhat costs are incurred in enforcing awards?
Underthe‘Americanrule,’eachpartymustbearitsowncostsforpost-awardlitigation,unlessotherwisespecifiedbycontract.
Other
47 Judicial system influenceWhat dominant features of your judicial system might exert an
influence on an arbitrator from your country?
AdominantfeatureofUSlitigationis‘pretrialdiscovery,’includingvoluminousdocumentproductionanddepositions.USarbitratorsmayfavourextensivediscoveryandmotionpractice.Witnessescanbecompelledtoappearatanarbitrationhearing(FAAsection7,which confers the same powers to compel a witness to appear upon atribunalasUScourts).Unlessotherwiseagreed,partyofficersmaytestify.
48 Regulation of activitiesWhat particularities exist in your jurisdiction that a foreign practitioner
should be aware of?
ForeignpractitionersparticipatinginanarbitrationintheUSshouldbeawareofdifferencesrelatingtotheattorney-clientprivilege,thework-productdoctrineandconflictofinterestrules.Forinstance,intheUS,itisgenerallyacceptedthatin-housecounselarecoveredbyattorney-clientprivilege.
© Law Business Research Ltd 2014
Strategic research partners of the ABA International section
For more information or to purchase books, please visit:
www.GettingTheDealThrough.com
Official Partner of the Latin American Corporate Counsel Association
ArbitrAtion 2014 iSSn 1750-9947
Annual volumes published on:
For more information or to purchase books, please visit: www.gettingthedealthrough.com
Acquisition FinanceAir TransportAnti-Corruption RegulationAnti-Money LaunderingArbitrationAsset RecoveryBanking RegulationCartel RegulationClimate RegulationConstructionCopyrightCorporate GovernanceCorporate ImmigrationData Protection & PrivacyDispute ResolutionDominancee-CommerceElectricity RegulationEnforcement of Foreign Judgments EnvironmentForeign Investment ReviewFranchiseGas RegulationInsurance & ReinsuranceIntellectual Property & AntitrustInvestment Treaty ArbitrationIslamic Finance & MarketsLabour & EmploymentLicensing
Life SciencesMediationMerger ControlMergers & AcquisitionsMiningOil Regulation OutsourcingPatents Pensions & Retirement PlansPharmaceutical AntitrustPrivate Antitrust Litigation Private ClientPrivate EquityProduct LiabilityProduct RecallProject FinancePublic ProcurementReal EstateRestructuring & Insolvency Right of PublicitySecurities FinanceShipbuildingShipping Tax ControversyTax on Inbound InvestmentTelecoms and MediaTrade & CustomsTrademarksVertical Agreements