How to Write a Summary of an Article? Arbitration Arbitration is the process of resolving an argument outside the formal court system. An arbitrator listens to both parties and determines an agreement that is fairest to both parties.
InSIAC received new cases from parties in 58 countries in 6 continents. The aggregate sum in dispute for all new case filings amounted to USD4. This will keep us firmly motivated to do better. My team and I would like to thank our partners and friends in the local and international legal and business communities for their continued faith in SIAC.
The workshop, which attracted an excellent turnout of attendees from law firms, arbitral institutions, and private companies, sought to offer a behind-the-scenes glimpse into the commencement of arbitral proceedings at SIAC.
The panel discussed various potential issues that a lawyer or a party may face when commencing an arbitration, and offered their insights on these issues from an institutional perspective.
Members of the audience Left to Right: The workshop ended on a high note with the panel addressing further burning questions from the attendees on, inter alia, the consolidation mechanism under the SIAC Rules and appointments by SIAC in ad hoc arbitrations.
To end the session, Mr Cooke expressed his gratitude to the panel from SIAC for taking their time to share their insights with the attendees. This debate was a timely one, coming slightly less than two years after the arbitration community drew up the Equal Representation in Arbitration Pledge, with signatories committing to diversify the pool of arbitrators and improve the profile and representation of women in arbitrations.
Mr Tan fired the opening salvo with the central thesis that women outperform men in personal qualities that were relevant to arbitral decision making — women tended to have more initiative and creativity, and displayed honesty and social awareness.
Citing various statistical studies as well as anecdotal evidence that women were smarter and live longerMr Tan presented a compelling case in favour of the participation of women on arbitral tribunals to improve decision making.
She argued that gender should make no difference to decision-making: Women arbitrators should be appointed on an equal opportunity basis, and not because of their gender.
Ms Jae concluded that supporting the motion would harm, instead of support, women, by perpetuating gender stereotypes and suggesting that the participation of women in arbitral tribunals was no more than a form of tokenism. Quite apart from the fact that women might have specific personal qualities and characteristics that lent themselves to the process of decision-making, the individual skills of a diverse group collectively contributed to greater group intelligence and translated to greater collaboration in making sense of evidence and submissions.
Gender diversity was a fact of the modern world, and the composition of tribunals should reflect this. The lyrics speak for themselves: At the end of this spirited debate, the audience spoke, and awarded the debate to Ms Barker and Ms Jae.
What appeared at first to be a straightforward motion reflected the nature of the complex and multi-faceted debate on inclusivity in the community. The women were still right on this score.
With Mr Born present to weigh in on how the President and the SIAC Court dealt with some of the applications filed by parties under the SIAC Rulesincluding applications for emergency arbitration, Expedited Procedure, consolidation and joinder, and prima facie decisions on jurisdiction, participants were able to gain valuable insights on how to develop an effective case strategy in cases administered under the SIAC Rules.
In terms of procedure, Mr Born noted that the President and the SIAC Court would look to the Secretariat to brief them on the facts, procedural complexities and competing arguments for each case. This briefing allowed the President and the Court Members to perform a detailed analysis of the merits of each application in complex cases where time was often of the essence.
Unsurprisingly, one of the hottest topics raised by the audience related to various provisions in the SIAC Rules concerned with speed and costs, showing that this remained an important factor for parties.
The pro tip received: Give SIAC an indication that you would be preparing to file an emergency arbitration so that the internal processes can be begun to ensure the quickest turnaround possible.
In response to questions on timelines, the Secretariat confirmed that the overwhelming majority of tribunals were able to meet the deadline. Mr Born explained that this may be due to the robust approach adopted by SIAC in consideration of these applications.
For instance, even if an application for Expedited Procedure met any of the threshold criterion under Rule 5.
As the discussion moved to the finer points of the Expedited Procedure, the panel received a comment on the possibility of SIAC affirmatively taking into account the efficiency with which an arbitrator dealt with a dispute when determining the costs of the arbitration, noting that sometimes it was substantially more difficult for an arbitrator to hear a case on a short timeframe and issue a quick award.By contrast, mandatory arbitration, also known as court-ordered arbitration, is a judicial mandate intended to resolve pending court cases, utilizing informal rules of evidence and procedure in an advisory arbitration process ordered by the court at an early stage of a lawsuit.
The process of arbitration can start only if there exists a valid Arbitration Agreement between the parties prior to the emergence of the dispute. As per Section 7, such an agreement must be in writing. I. “Silliest internet atheist argument” is a hotly contested title, but I have a special place in my heart for the people who occasionally try to prove Biblical fallibility by pointing out whales are not a type of fish.
I. “Silliest internet atheist argument” is a hotly contested title, but I have a special place in my heart for the people who occasionally try to prove Biblical fallibility by pointing out whales are not a type of fish. Domino’s DXP® Delivery Vehicle Contest OFFICIAL RULES.
THIS CONTEST IS INTENDED FOR PARTICIPATION IN THE FORTY-EIGHT CONTIGUOUS UNITED STATES AND DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ONLY AND WILL BE GOVERNED BY U.S. LAW. Information is being provided to Domino’s National Advertising Fund Inc.
a. a demand that the dispute be referred to arbitration; b. the names, addresses, telephone numbers, facsimile numbers and electronic mail addresses, if known, of the parties to the arbitration and their representatives, if any;.