This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
On its part, the Respondent raised several objections to the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, specifically pointing to several instances of corrupt and illegal acts allegedly committed by Worley at the making and during the operation of the investment. Worley may have willfully failed to monitor and investigate Tecnazul’s corrupt activities.
As discussed below a recurring theme was the need to find a balance between having model clauses that were, on the one hand, innovative and likely to lead to faster and more efficient resolution of disputes in practice, while, on the other hand, containing sufficient quality and due process safeguards.
The Court considered that “the suggestion that it was unnecessary to call any expert witnesses was plainly not an expression of a balanced and impartial view, or merely a concern about the hearing over-running, or an attempt by the arbitrator to impose an orderly and economical procedure on the parties.”
These included ongoing issues such as poor institutional coordination, lack of transparency, high levels of corruption, and murky lines of accountability. Early reformers in this first revolution were Ethiopia (2005), Ghana (2005), Kenya (2007), Tanzania (2004), Uganda (2003), and Zambia (2006).
More from our authors: Dealing with Bribery and Corruption in International Commercial Arbitration: To Probe or Not to Probe by Emmanuel Obiora Igbokwe € 190 Arbitration in Egypt: A Practitioner's Guide by Ibrahim Shehata € 190 ” (see Lepoutre/Riva (1998): Nacionalidad y Apatridia, Rol del ACNUR.
The Honourable Wayne Martin AC KC is an arbitrator, mediator, and former Chief Justice of Western Australia (2006-2018). Do you think the balance is right in Australia? As Chief Justice, Mr Martin was a notable pioneer, particularly for his creation of the Supreme Court of Western Australia’s Arbitration List.
It restricts reviews solely to the specific criteria detailed in Section 55, which aligns with Article 34(2) of the 2006 UNCITRAL Model Law and Article V of the New York Convention. Under the AMA, the ART operates under a strict framework.
Thirdly , SIACs amendments are in line with the 2006 amendments to the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration (Model Law), and specifically, the introduction of Articles 17B, 17C, and 17D. This strikes an adequate balance between fundamental due process considerations and the need for urgent relief.
Japan and Azerbaijan modernized their national arbitration laws to align with the 2006 UNCITRAL Model Law. These amendments align the Arbitration Act with the 2006 UNCITRAL Model Law, rather than the 1985 version. Notably, amendments to Japans Arbitration Act (Act No.
Burn Standard (2006), the SC has repeatedly warned that the Act only prescribes a supervisory role for Indian courts. Friends Coal Carbonisation (2006) and Oriental Structural Engineers Pvt. Section 37 of the Act further allows parties to appeal a court order setting aside or refusing to set aside an arbitral award under Section 34.
This post first examines the gender balance and emerging arbitration hubs in Africa (Section 1). More from our authors: Dealing with Bribery and Corruption in International Commercial Arbitration: To Probe or Not to Probe by Emmanuel Obiora Igbokwe 190 Arbitration in Egypt: A Practitioner's Guide by Ibrahim Shehata 190
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 5,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content