issue #11, week 32. 06 August 2013
Prepared by TDM and Aloysius Gng (CEPMLP/Dundee)

TDM News Digest

provides a condensed overview of recent events of interest to the international arbitration community.

Comments, suggestions, news?

If you have news, comments or suggestions feel free to send them.

Archived issues

Transnational Dispute Management Linkedin, Twitter, Facebook



Follow us OGEL & TDM on twitter @ogeltdm



Notice 2021: New publication:

Transnational Arbitration Observer (News & Analysis)

Covering international dispute management, arbitration, mediation, investment disputes (ISDS), and more...

TAO Twitter, TAO Linkedin

Launched 2022: Transnational Arbitration Observer (TAO) - https://taobserver.com/ - is a source of daily news and analysis aimed at keeping its readership abreast of recent developments in transnational arbitration (investment & commercial arbitration, mediation, and so forth). It complements the existing Transnational Dispute Management (TDM, ISSN 1875-4120) law journal. Visit https://taobserver.com/ and register for the daily headlines (email) or follow TAO on social media twitter.com/taobserver and linkedin.com/company/taobserver/ Questions? Contact info@maris.nl.

TDM

Young-OGEMID virtual symposia

Young-OGEMID is a free listserv associated with our Transnational Dispute Management law journal for Students and (junior) Associates - you can apply for your free membership here: www.transnational-dispute-management.com/young-ogemid/

Call for contributions

Recent issues:

NEWS

Ecuador to propose eliminating arbitration centers at ALBA meeting next week

Jul 27, http://economia.terra.com.co/noticias/noticia.aspx?idNoticia=201307271930_AFP_TX-PAR-JGS86

El presidente ecuatoriano, Rafael Correa, propondrá desconocer los centros de arbitraje en litigios que mantengan los países de la Alianza Bolivariana para los Pueblos de Nuestra América (ALBA) con multinacionales extranjeras durante una reunión del próximo martes en Guayaquil (suroeste). Correa recordó el sábado, durante su informe semanal de labores, los dos litigos que su país mantiene con las petroleras estadounidense Oxy y Chevron en centros de arbitraje internacionales, a los cuales calificó como "corruptos totalmente" y que "deberían tener prohibida la entrada" a los países del ALBA. "Todo eso lo hablamos con Evo Morales (durante su visita oficial a Quito) y continuaremos hablando el martes que se realiza la cumbre del ALBA en la ciudad de Guayaquil", agregó el mandatario.

ECHR Khodorkovskiy and Lebedev v Russia (application nos. 11082/06 and 13772/05) - Charges founded but the applicants’ human rights have been violated

Jul 25, http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/webservices/content/pdf/003-4445086-5349135

Charges against two Russian business executives had a sound basis, but the hearing of their case was unfair, and their placement in remote penal colonies unjustified

The case of Khodorkovskiy (no. 2) and Lebedev (no. 2) v. Russia (application nos. 11082/06 and 13772/05) concerned criminal proceedings which ended in a judgment of September 2005 by the Moscow City Court in which Mr Khodorkovskiy and Mr Lebedev, two former top-managers and major shareholders of a large industrial group, were found guilty of large-scale tax evasion and fraud. The domestic proceedings at the heart of the present case are commonly known in Russia as "the first trial of Khodorkovskiy and Lebedev".

This is the second case lodged by Mr Khodorkovskiy and Mr Lebedev before the Court. Their first two applications (no. 5829/04 and no. 4493/04) concerned the beginning of their criminal prosecution and were examined by the Court in 2011 and 2007.

In today's Chamber judgment in the case, which is not final[1], the European Court of Human Rights held that there had been:

Principal facts

The applicants are Mikhail Borisovich Khodorkovskiy and Platon Leonidovich Lebedev, Russian nationals. They are currently serving their prison sentences in the regions of Karelia and Yamalo-Nenetskiy (Russia).

Before their arrest the applicants were top-managers and major shareholders of a large industrial group which included Yukos oil company, Apatit mining enterprise, Menatep bank and a number of other large business entities. They were amongst the richest men in Russia. Mr Khodorkovskiy, the first applicant, was also politically active: he allocated significant funds to support opposition parties and funded several development programs and NGOs. In addition, Yukos pursued large business projects which went against the official petroleum policy.

The applicants believed that because of Mr Khodorkovskiy's political ambitions and his independence in business matters President Putin orchestrated criminal prosecution of Yukos managers which led to their conviction and imprisonment as well as the dismantlement of the Yukos business empire.

In 2003 the General Prosecutor's Office opened a criminal case which concerned allegedly fraudulent privatisation of Apatit mining enterprise in 1994. In July 2003 Mr Lebedev was arrested in connection with this case and detained on remand. In October 2003 Mr Khodorkovskiy was also arrested, charged and detained.

The facts relative to the arrest and the first months of the applicants' detention on remand were examined by the European Court in application nos. 5829/04 and no. 4493/04. The tax and enforcement proceedings brought against Yukos oil company, which led to its liquidation, were examined by the European Court in application no. 14902/04.

In the course of the investigation new charges against the applicants were added. In particular, the applicants were accused of having registered through their subordinates a number of companies in a low-tax zone. Those companies claimed to operate in the low- tax zones, and, on that ground, they qualified for tax cuts. However, in reality the trading companies had no business activities in those places and existed only on paper. The applicants were also suspected of having evaded personal income taxes by declaring their revenues in Yukos not as salaries but as "consulting fees". The applicants also faced other charges of an economic character.

In 2003 GPO conducted series of searches and seized tons of documents and electronic files. Many managers of Yukos fled Russia; others were questioned as witnesses or indicted and stood trial.

In the proceedings the applicants were assisted by a team of highly-qualified lawyers. However, the prison administration and later the judge insisted on checking all written exchanges between the applicants and their lawyers. On several occasions the lawyers, who were suspected of having breached the rules, were subjected to body-searches.

The trial started in June 2004 and lasted until May 2005. In the courtroom the applicants were detained in an iron cage which separated them from the public and from their lawyers. Any exchange of written documents between the applicants and their lawyers was only possible if the presiding judge reviewed the documents beforehand. The applicant's oral exchanges during the trial could be overheard by the convoy officers.

At the trial the court examined dozens of witnesses for the prosecution and studied hundreds of pages of written materials. The applicants asked for some of the documents to be excluded because they had been unlawfully obtained by the prosecution but the court admitted them for examination. The applicants also tried to obtain attendance of some of the witnesses for the prosecution, in particular two experts, but the court did not summon them.

On the substance of the case, the applicants pleaded not guilty. They claimed that the trading companies registered in the low-tax zone operated on the basis of agreements concluded with the local authorities and complied with the formal requirements of the law which made them eligible for tax cuts. For many years that mode of operation was not contested by the tax service.

In 2005 the defence started presenting their evidence. However, most of it was declared inadmissible by the court. Thus, the court refused to consider several expert opinions in the sphere of tax law and accounting, and rejected reports by two large audit firms. In essence, the court decided that the defence had no right to collect expert evidence if the experts appointed by the prosecution had already delivered their opinion. The defence also sought disclosure of certain documents, in particular official correspondence, without success.

On 16 May 2005 the applicants were found guilty on account of most of the charges and sentenced to nine years' imprisonment. In addition, they were ordered to pay to the State RUB 17,395,449,282 (over 510 million euros) on account of unpaid company taxes. On 22 September 2005 the Moscow City Court upheld the lower court's judgment in the main and reduced the sentence to eight years' imprisonment.

Both applicants were sent to serve their sentences in remote colonies. Thus, Mr Khodorkovskiy was sent to Chita region, which was over six thousand kilometres from Moscow, and Mr Lebedev was detained in the Yamal peninsula, more than three thousand kilometres from Moscow.

The applicants' case attracted considerable public attention in Russia and abroad. Many prominent public figures and influential organisations expressed their doubts as to the fairness of the criminal proceedings against Mr Khodorkovskiy and his colleagues. The Russian Government denied allegations of improper motives.

Procedure and composition of the Court

The applications were lodged with the European Court of Human Rights on 16 March 2006 and 28 March 2005, respectively.

Judgment was given by a Chamber of seven judges, composed as follows:

Decision of the Court

Article 3: conditions in the remand prison (Mr Lebedev)

Mr Lebedev did not develop in sufficient detail his complaints about general conditions of detention in the remand prison. As to the conditions in the isolation cell, where he was placed for seven days in 2005, they were indeed quite tough, but in view of the short duration of his detention there the treatment complained of did not reach the minimum threshold of severity required for a violation of Article 3 to be found.

The Court also noted that Mr Lebedev had not been given hot meals and had been deprived of walks on the days when he was taken to court. However, he could afford to buy his own food, make tea or instant meals in the court building, and have physical exercise at least occasionally. In absence of other aggravating factors, such as overcrowding or bad conditions of transportation, the Court concluded that the conditions of detention on remand had not been inhuman or degrading.

Conclusion: no violation (unanimously)

Article 3: conditions in the courtroom (Mr Lebedev)

In response to Mr Lebedev's complaint that he had been placed in a metal cage during the court hearings, the Court noted that he had been accused of non-violent crimes, had no previous criminal record, and that there was no evidence that he had been predisposed to violence. His trial was covered by almost all major national and international mass media, so he had been permanently exposed to the public in such a setting. The security arrangements, given their cumulative effect, had been excessive and could reasonably have been perceived by Mr Lebedev and the public as humiliating.

Conclusion: violation (unanimously)

Article 5 § 3: length of detention on remand (Mr Lebedev)

Mr Lebedev was arrested on 2 July 2003. In Lebedev (no. 1) the Court did not find a violation of Article 5 § 3 on account of the length of his detention during the first months after his arrest. The question in the present case was whether the ensuing period of his detention until his conviction in May 2005 had been justified. The Court noted that after the end of the investigation the risk of tampering with evidence had diminished. In addition, Mr Lebedev had lost control over the company, and his ability to influence its personnel was therefore reduced. Furthermore, the domestic courts' references to the risk of absconding, "international connections" and "character" of the accused were too vague. Lastly, in ordering the extensions the courts had used stereotyped wording and had not considered alternative preventive measures. The Court therefore concluded that the domestic courts had failed to conduct a genuine judicial review of the need for Mr Lebedev's continued detention.

Conclusion: violation (unanimously)

Article 5 § 4: conduct of the detention proceedings (Mr Lebedev)

The Court noted a certain disparity between the parties in the preparation of the proceedings in which Mr Lebedev's detention had been extended, but found that it was not incompatible with Article 5 § 4 of the Convention. As to the alleged failure of the court of appeal to give detailed reasoning for rejecting Mr Lebedev's arguments, this aspect of the case has already been addressed under Article 5 § 3. Finally, the Court also examined speediness of review of Mr Lebedev's appeals against the detention orders. The Court found that the 26-day delay involved in the examination of the appeal against the detention order of 14 December 2004 had not been justified.

Conclusion: violation on account of the delayed examination of the detention order of 14 December 2004, no violation on other points (unanimously)

Article 6 § 1: impartiality

The applicants claimed that procedural decisions taken by Judge Kolesnikova during their trial had shown that she was biased. However, in the opinion of the Court, that was not sufficient to reveal that the judge had had any particular predisposition against the applicants.

Next, the applicants argued that Judge Kolesnikova had herself been under investigation during their trial. However, that allegation was only a rumor, and was therefore dismissed by the Court.

Finally, the applicants suggested that Judge Kolesnikova had been biased because of her previous findings in the case of Mr Shakhnovskiy, another top-manager of Yukos. Mr Shakhnovskiy was found guilty for having received his salary in the guise of "consultancy fees" and thus obtaining tax cuts. The Court accepted that some of the findings of Judge Kolesnikova in the Shakhnovskiy case had been quasi identical to her finding in the applicants' case. However, the Court noted that, as a matter of practice, criminal adjudication frequently involved judges presiding over various trials in which a number of persons were co-accused. Judge Kolesnikova, under the Russian law, had not been formally bound by her earlier findings and had not made any statements which would prejudge the question of the applicants' guilt in the Shakhnovskiy judgment. Admission of certain evidence in Mr Shakhnovskiy's case had not prevented the judge rejecting that evidence in the later proceedings.

Conclusion: no violation (unanimously)

Article 6 § 1: fairness of the proceedings

Time and facilities for the preparation of the defence

The Court noted that Mr Lebedev had eight months and 20 days to study over 41,000 pages of his case-file, and Mr Khodorkovskiy had five months and 18 days to study over 55,000 pages of his. The Court noted the complexity of the documents, the need to make notes, compare documents, and discuss the case-file with lawyers. It also took account of the breaks in the schedule of working with the case-file, and of uncomfortable conditions in which the applicants had had to work (impossibility to make photocopies in prison, inability of the applicants to keep copies of the documents in their cells, restrictions on receiving copies of documents from their lawyers, etc.). However, the applicants were not ordinary defendants: each of them had been assisted by a team of highly professional lawyers of great renown, all of them privately retained. Even if they were unable to study each and every document in the case file personally, that task could have been entrusted to their lawyers. The lawyers were able to make photocopies; the applicants were allowed to take notes from the case-file and keep their notebooks with them. Indeed, the applicants, who both had university degrees, were senior executives of one of the largest oil companies in Russia and knew the business processes at the heart of the case arguably better than anybody else.

The Court further examined the conditions in which the defence had had to work at the trial and during the appeal proceedings. In particular, at some point the judge had decided to intensify the course of the trial and have hearings every day. However, the defence had been able to ask for adjournments when necessary, and such adjournments had been granted.

Finally, at the appeal stage the defence had had over three months to draft written pleadings and to prepare for an oral argument. Although the defence had had to start preparing their appeal without having the entirety of the trial materials before them and there had been doubts as to the accuracy of the trial record, the Court was not persuaded that any such inaccuracies had made the conviction unsafe. Furthermore, the defence was aware of the procedural decisions that had been taken during the trial and what materials had been added. They had audio recordings of the trial proceedings and could have relied on them in the preparation of their points of appeal.

Conclusion: no violation (unanimously)

Lawyer-client confidentiality

The applicants claimed that the authorities did not respect confidentiality of their contacts with their lawyers, in breach of Article 6 § 1 and 3 (c).

First, the applicants complained about summonses sent by the prosecution to Mr Drel, one of the lawyers for the applicants. However, Mr Drel refused to testify, and that refusal did not lead to any sanctions against him. So, in the Court's opinion that episode had had no effect on the applicants' right to legal assistance.

By contrast, the Court criticised the authorities for searching Mr Drel's office. Mr Drel was the lawyer for both applicants in the same criminal case in which the searches had been ordered, and the investigators were aware of that fact. The authorities had not explained what sort of information Mr Drel had allegedly had, how important it had been for the investigation, and whether it could have been obtained by other means. At the relevant time Mr Drel was not under suspicion of any kind. Most significantly, the search in Mr Drel's office had not been authorised by a separate court warrant, as required by the law.

The Court was also concerned with the prison administration perusing all written documents exchanged between the applicants and their lawyers during the meetings in the remand prison. First, such perusal had no firm basis in domestic law which did not regulate specifically such situations. Furthermore, notes, drafts, outlines, action plans and such like prepared by the lawyer for or during a meeting with his detained client are to all intents and purposes privileged material. Any exception from the general principle of confidentiality is only permissible if the authorities have a reasonable cause to believe that the professional privilege is being abused, which was not the case. The Court noted that there were no ascertainable facts showing that the applicants' lawyers or the applicants themselves might abuse the secrecy of their contacts. Moreover, the measures complained of lasted for over two years.

Finally, the Court examined the conditions in which the applicants had been able to communicate with their lawyers in the courtroom. Judge Kolesnikova had requested the defence lawyers to show her all written documents they wished to exchange with the applicants. Furthermore, the oral consultations between the applicants and their lawyers could have been overheard by the convoy officers. During the adjournments the lawyers had to discuss the case with their clients in the close vicinity of the prison guards. The Court concluded that the secrecy of the applicants' exchanges, both oral and written, with their lawyers had therefore been seriously impaired during the hearings.

Conclusion: violation (unanimously)

Taking and examination of evidence

The Court found in particular that the refusal of the domestic courts to hear at the trial two experts who had prepared an economic study for the prosecution was contrary to the requirements of Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d). Those experts had clearly been "key witnesses", since their conclusions went to the heart of some of the charges against the applicants. The defence had taken no part in the preparation of the study and had not been able to put questions to the experts at an earlier stage. In addition, the defence explained to the District Court why they needed to question those experts and there were no good reasons for preventing the experts from coming to the court.

It also expressed concern with the rejection on formal grounds of evidence proposed by the defence, and in particular the audit reports by Ernst and Young and Price Waterhouse Coopers. Those reports were relevant to the very subject-matter of the accusations against the applicants and related to expert evidence already obtained from the prosecution. In the opinion of the Court, the defence was therefore put in a disadvantageous position vis-à-vis the prosecution. It meant that only the prosecution had been entitled to select experts, formulating questions and producing expert reports for the court, while the defence had no such right. The only option available for the defence was to obtain oral questioning of "specialists" at the trial, but "specialists" had a different procedural status to "experts", as they had no access to primary materials in the case and the court refused to consider their written opinions. Thus, the defence had been unable to challenge the opinions of experts invited by the prosecution. It had therefore perturbed the equality of arms between the parties.

In view of the above findings the Court considered that there was no need to examine other allegations by the applicants concerning the process of administration of evidence.

Conclusion: violation (unanimously)

Article 6 § 2: presumption of innocence and metal cage issue

The applicants complained that being tried whilst caged portrayed them to the public as criminals, contrary to the presumption of innocence. The Court considered that, in view of its findings under Article 3 in the present case as well as in the case of Khodorkovskiy No. 1, it was not necessary to examine this part of the applicants' complaint separately.

Conclusion: no need for separate examination (unanimously)

Article 7: foreseeability of the tax law

The applicants argued that they suffered from a completely novel and unpredictable interpretation of the tax law. They claimed that the trading companies' operation in the low-tax zone and the technique of "transfer pricing" they had used was well-known and regarded as lawful.

The Court started with recalling its findings in the Yukos case, which concerned the use of the same tax minimisation technique. In that case the Court concluded that the recovery from Yukos of the amount of unpaid taxes did not violate Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property) to the Convention since the tax cuts had been obtained by the trading companies unlawfully.

It then observed that forms of economic activity are in constant development, and so are the methods of tax evasion. The law in this area may be sufficiently flexible to adapt to new situations, without, however, becoming unpredictable.

Indeed, previous to the applicants' case, there were no criminal convictions for such tax minimisation schemes, the courts rejecting allegations of fictitious operations by trading companies in low-tax zones as it was very difficult for the prosecution to prove.

However, in the applicants' case the Court accepted as reasonable the national courts' conclusion that all operations of the trading companies had been sham. It considered that the scheme mounted by the applicants had to be distinguished from a bona fide tax minimisation technique. Whereas a part of the scheme had been visible to the authorities, the applicants had misrepresented or concealed some important aspects of it. Thus, they had never informed the tax authorities about their true relation to the trading companies. The benefits of the trading companies had been returned to Yukos indirectly. All business activities which had generated profit were in fact carried out in Moscow, not in a low-tax zone. The trading companies, which existed only on paper, had no real assets or personnel. The tax minimisation was the sole reason for the creation of the trading companies in the low-tax zone. Finally, it was difficult for the Court to imagine that the applicants, as senior executives and co-owners of Yukos, had not been aware of the scheme and had not known that the information included in the fiscal reporting of the trading companies did not reflect the true nature of their operations. Thus, the applicants' acts could be reasonably interpreted as "submitting false information to the tax authorities" which was the definition of tax evasion under the Russian Criminal Code.

In sum, the Court concluded that even if the application of the law in the applicants' case had been novel and unprecedented, it was not unreasonable and corresponded to the common-sense understanding of tax evasion.

In so far as the personal income tax evasion was concerned, the applicants insisted that they had given consulting services to foreign firms and that the tax cuts they had received as "individual entrepreneurs" were legitimate. However, the domestic courts had established that such service agreements were fictitious, and that the applicants had knowingly misinformed the tax authorities about the true nature of their revenues ("fees" instead of "salary"). Those conclusions were reasonable and the Court upheld them.

Finally, the Court did not accept the applicants' argument that the authorities' long- standing tolerance of such "transfer pricing" arrangements had made them legitimate and excluded criminal liability, primarily because the reasons behind such tolerance were unclear. It was possible that the authorities had simply not had sufficient information or resources to prosecute the applicants and/or other businessmen for using such schemes. It required a massive criminal investigation to prove that the documents submitted to the tax authorities had not reflected the true nature of the business operations. Finally, there was no evidence that tax minimisation schemes used by other businessmen had been exactly the same as the scheme employed by the applicants. The Court therefore concluded that the authorities' attitude towards such practices had not amounted to a conscious tolerance or selective application of criminal law.

Conclusion: no violation (unanimously)

Article 8: transfer to remote penal colonies

The applicants complained that their transfer to the penal colonies situated in Siberia and in the Far North had made it impossible for them to see their families. The Court accepted that the situation complained of constituted an interference with the applicants' "private and family life". The Federal Service of Execution of Sentence (FSIN) had the power to dispatch convicts from big cities to the colonies situated in other regions to avoid overcrowding. However, for such situations the Russian Code of Execution of Sentences established a simple rule: it allowed the sending of a convict to the next closest region, but not several thousand kilometres away. A general plan establishing quotas for the distribution of convicts amongst colonies existed, but it did not describe a comprehensible method of distribution of convicts. And it was hardly conceivable that there were no free places for the two applicants in any of the many colonies situated closer to Moscow. The Court stressed that the distribution of the prison population must not remain entirely at the discretion of the administrative bodies and that the interests of the convicts in maintaining at least some family and social ties had to somehow be taken into account.

Conclusion: violation (unanimously)

Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention: damages Mr Khodorkovskiy had been required to pay

Along with the criminal conviction the applicants were ordered to reimburse over 17 billion Rubles (over 510 million euros) to the State in tax arrears due by Yukos. The Court agreed that where a limited liability company is used merely as a façade for fraudulent actions by its owners or managers, piercing of the corporate veil may be an appropriate solution for defending the rights of its creditors, including the State. However, there should be a solid legislative basis for doing so. Neither the Russian Tax Code at the time nor the Civil Code permitted the recovery of company tax debts from the company's managers. Furthermore, the Russian courts repeatedly interpreted the law as not allowing shifting of liability for unpaid company taxes from the company to its executives. Finally, the Court stressed that the findings of the district court, in the part concerning the civil claim, were extremely short and contained neither a reference to applicable provisions of the domestic law nor any comprehensible calculation of damages, as if it was an insignificant matter. The Court concluded that the award of damages in favor of the State had been made in an arbitrary fashion, in violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention.

Conclusion: violation (unanimously)

Article 18: Political motivation of the prosecution

The applicants alleged that their prosecution was politically motivated.

The Court recalled that the whole structure of the Convention rested on the general assumption that public authorities in the member States acted in good faith. A mere suspicion that the authorities had used their powers for ulterior purposes was not sufficient to prove a violation of Article 18; instead a very exacting standard of proof had to be applied.

The Court agreed that circumstantial evidence surrounding the applicants' arrest and trial constituted at first glance a case of politically motivated prosecution. Indeed, this opinion of the applicants' trial had been corroborated by political figures, international organisations and courts in many European countries.

Thus, the Court was prepared to admit that some government officials had their own reasons to push for the applicants' prosecution. However, it was insufficient to conclude that the applicants would not have been convicted otherwise. None of the accusations against the applicants had concerned their political activities, the applicants were not opposition leaders or public officials, and the acts they stood accused of were not directly related to their participation in political life. The accusations against the applicants had been serious, and the case against them had had a "healthy core". Thus, even if there were an element of improper motivation behind their prosecution, it did not grant immunity from answering the accusations against them. Nor did it make the prosecution illegitimate "from start to finish", as alleged by the applicants.

Ultimately, the Court stressed that the above finding did not preclude it from examining under Article 18 the subsequent proceedings concerning the applicants' conviction in the second criminal case.

Conclusion: no violation (unanimously)

Article 34: harassment of the applicants' lawyers (Mr Khodorkovskiy)

Mr Khodorkovskiy complained that, in order to prevent him from complaining to Strasbourg, the authorities had harassed his lawyers. The Court observed that Mr Khodorkovskiy had submitted a very detailed and well-supported application to show notably: the negative attitude of the law-enforcement agencies vis-à-vis his legal team, especially after the end of the first trial; several attempts by the prosecution to disbar his lawyers, subjecting them to administrative and financial checks; and, the denial of two of his foreign lawyers visas, one having been expelled from Russia in a precipitated manner. The aim of such disciplinary and other measures directed against Mr Khodorkovskiy's lawyers was far from evident, and the Government was silent on those points. It was therefore natural to assume that such measures had been linked to his case before this Court. It therefore concluded that the authorities had failed to respect their obligation under Article 34 of the Convention to not interfere with the right of individual petition to the Court.

Conclusion: violation (unanimously)

Article 41: just satisfaction

The court held that Russia was to pay Mr Khodorkovskiy 10,000 euros (EUR) in respect of non-pecuniary damage. Mr Lebedev's pecuniary claims were rejected in full.

[1] Under Articles 43 and 44 of the Convention, this Chamber judgment is not final. During the three-month period following its delivery, any party may request that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber of the Court. If such a request is made, a panel of five judges considers whether the case deserves further examination. In that event, the Grand Chamber will hear the case and deliver a final judgment. If the referral request is refused, the Chamber judgment will become final on that day. Once a judgment becomes final, it is transmitted to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe for supervision of its execution. Further information about the execution process can be found here: www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/execution

WTO: Panel established on Peru’s measures on Guatemala’s agricultural exports

Jul 23, http://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news13_e/dsb_23jul13_e.htm

Pursuant to the second request from Guatemala, the Dispute Settlement Body, on 23 July 2013, established a panel to examine the dispute “Peru – Additional Duty on Imports of Certain Agricultural Products”. Argentina, China, El Salvador, the European Union, India and the United States reserved their third-party rights to participate in the panel’s proceedings.

UNIDO: Trade Capacity Building Resource Guide 2013

Aug 06, http://www.unido.org/tcbresourceguide2013.html

To download the Trade Capacity Building Resource Guide, 2013 edition: Volume I: http://www.unido.org/fileadmin/user_media_upgrade/Resources/Publications/TCB_Resource_Guide/194636_INTERAGENCY_RESOURCE_GUIDE_12_VOL1_v5.pdf and Volume II: http://www.unido.org/fileadmin/user_media_upgrade/Resources/Publications/TCB_Resource_Guide/194636_INTERAGENCY_RESOURCE_GUIDE_2013_VOL2_4.pdf

It is widely recognized by both multilateral and bilateral development partners that enhancement of the capacity to participate in global trade is critical for economic growth in developing countries. This has put the need for trade-related technical assistance on the forefront of economic development.

Bilateral and multilateral development partners provide a wide range of services which often need to complement each other if they are to support national trade development needs and strategies in a coherent and efficient manner.

In response to such needs, UNIDO has published the first edition of the Trade Capacity Building Inter-agency Resource Guide in 2008, followed by an enhanced edition in 2010.

For the first time, in order to further increase the use and distribution of the Guide, all information is updated in an interactive web tool with search functions (www.tcbresourceguide.org).

The Guide has been hailed by multilateral and bilateral development partners as well as policy-makers in developing countries as a useful and informative tool in the area of trade-capacity building. It has been acknowledged that the Resource Guide is a unique source of information for developing countries and donors for the development of technical assistance programmes, and serves to facilitate the coordination of trade capacity-building activities within the United Nations system, in particular through UN Resident Coordinator and UN Country Teams.

In response to growing demand, a new and further enhanced third edition has now been made available. The 2013 edition of the Trade Capacity Building Resource Guide further increases its relevance in the area of trade-related technical assistance by sharpening its focus on the emerging dynamic trends, in particular, on the costs of trading, adding a value chain perspective and South-South and triangular cooperation.

The Guide includes now 31 UN agencies and 36 bilateral profiles. The trade-related services of altogether 32 Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and sixteen G-20 countries, some of which are also OECD members are reflected in the Guide. This compilation of major bilateral and multilateral technical assistance services as well as inclusion of South-South and triangular cooperation initiatives in the area of trade capacity building represents a milestone, which is expected to significantly increase both the coverage and potential use of the Guide.

This so far most comprehensive compilation of the Resource Guide will significantly contribute to increasing the transparency and efficiency of trade-related technical assistance and its benefits for countries and peoples in their efforts to stimulate trade-led economic growth, increased employment and the creation of wealth.

In the spirit of the Millennium Development Goals, the Guide represents a significant step forward in the journey towards a strong and meaningful global partnership, involving multilateral and bilateral development partners, for the reduction of poverty through trade-driven economic growth and wealth creation.

The Guide was prepared by UNIDO under a mandate by the High-Level Committee on Programmes (HLCP) of the UN System Chief Executives Board (CEB).

ICC announces newly named Commission on Arbitration and ADR

Jul 29, http://www.iccwbo.org/News/Articles/2013/ICC-announces-newly-named-Commission-on-Arbitration-and-ADR/

The ICC Executive Board has approved a name change for the ICC Commission on Arbitration. The commission's new name is the ICC Commission on Arbitration and ADR. The change aims to better reflect the broad scope of the commission's activities, which primarily encompass international arbitration but also all other dispute resolution services offered by ICC.

ICJ: Certain Activities carried out by Nicaragua in the Border Area (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua)

Jul 25, http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/150/17482.pdf

Construction of a Road in Costa Rica along the San Juan River (Nicaragua v. Costa Rica)

The Court finds that the circumstances, as they now present themselves to the Court, are not such as to require the exercise of its power to modify the measures indicated in the Order of 8 March 2011 and reaffirms those measures

THE HAGUE, 25 July 2013. By an Order of 16 July 2013, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, ruled on the requests submitted by Costa Rica and Nicaragua, respectively, for the modification of the provisional measures indicated by the Court on 8 March 2011 in the case concerning Certain Activities carried out by Nicaragua in the Border Area (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua), (hereinafter "the Costa Rica v. Nicaragua case").

In its Order of 16 July 2013, the Court found, by fifteen votes to two, "that the circumstances, as they now present themselves to the Court, are not such as to require the exercise of its power to modify the measures indicated in the Order of 8 March 2011". It "[r]eaffirm[ed]", unanimously, the provisional measures indicated in that Order, in particular the requirement that the Parties "shall refrain from any action which might aggravate or extend the dispute before the Court or make it more difficult to resolve".

Reasoning of the Court

The Court first recalls that, by its Order of 8 March 2011 made in the Costa Rica v. Nicaragua case, it had indicated, amongst other things, that "[e]ach Party shall refrain from sending to, or maintaining in the disputed territory, including the caño, any personnel, whether civilian, police or security" and that "Costa Rica may dispatch civilian personnel charged with the protection of the environment to the disputed territory, including the caño, but only in so far as it is necessary to avoid irreparable prejudice being caused to the part of the wetland where that territory is situated" (para. 3).

In its Order of 16 July 2013, the Court sets out the modifications requested by Costa Rica and by Nicaragua, and notes that each of the Parties asked it to reject the other's request (paras. 12 to 15).

The Court further recalls that, in order to rule on those requests, it must determine whether the conditions set forth in Article 76, paragraph 1, of the Rules of Court have been fulfilled. That paragraph reads as follows: "At the request of a party the Court may, at any time before the final judgment in the case, revoke or modify any decision concerning provisional measures if, in its opinion, some change in the situation justifies such revocation or modification." (Para. 16.)

Costa Rica's request

In the first place, Costa Rica complains of "Nicaragua's sending to the disputed area . . . and maintaining thereon large numbers of persons" and, secondly, of the "activities undertaken by those persons affecting that territory and its ecology". In Costa Rica's view, these actions, which have occurred since the Court decided to indicate provisional measures, create a new situation necessitating the modification of the Order of 8 March 2011, in the form of further provisional measures, in particular so as to prevent the presence of any individual in the disputed territory other than civilian personnel sent by Costa Rica and charged with the protection of the environment (para. 19).

Nicaragua maintains that the persons referred to by Costa Rica are not part of the Government of Nicaragua, but young people, members of a private movement (the Guardabarranco Environmental Movement), who are present in the said territory in order to undertake environmental conservation activities (para. 24).

Decision of the Court on Costa Rica's request

In its Order of 16 July 2013, the Court regards it as having been established that, since the rendering of its Order of 8 March 2011, organized groups of persons, whose presence was not contemplated when it made its decision to indicate provisional measures, are regularly staying in the disputed territory. It considers that this fact does indeed constitute, in the present case, a change in the situation within the meaning of Article 76 of the Rules of Court (para. 25).

The Court then examines whether that change in the situation is such as to justify the modification of the Order of 2011. It states that such a modification is subject to the same general conditions as those governing the indication of provisional measures (Article 41 of the Statute of the Court). The Court recalls in this respect that it may only indicate provisional measures if irreparable prejudice may be caused to rights which are the subject of dispute in judicial proceedings and that that power must be exercised only if there is urgency, in the sense that there is a real and imminent risk that such prejudice may be caused before the Court has given its final decision (para. 30).

After setting out the arguments of the Parties concerning these various points, the Court considers "that, as matters stand, it has not been demonstrated sufficiently that there is a risk of irreparable prejudice to the rights claimed by Costa Rica". It states that "[t]he facts put forward by Costa Rica, whether the presence of Nicaraguan nationals or the activities which they are carrying out in the disputed territory, do not appear, in the present circumstances as they are known to the Court, to be such as to cause irreparable harm to `its right to sovereignty, to territorial integrity, and to non-interference with its lands'". Nor, the Court continues, "does the evidence included in the case file establish the existence of a proven risk of irreparable damage to the environment". Moreover, the Court "does not see, in the facts as they have been reported to it, the evidence of urgency that would justify the indication of further provisional measures" (paras. 32-35).

Consequently, the Court considers that, "despite the change that has occurred in the situation, the conditions have not been fulfilled for it to modify the measures that it indicated in its Order of 8 March 2011" (para. 36).

Nicaragua's request

Considering that Costa Rica's request is "unsustainable", Nicaragua submits its own request for the modification or adaptation of the Order of 8 March 2011. It considers that there has been a change in the factual and legal situations in question as a result of, first, the construction of a 160-km long road along the right bank of the San Juan River and, second, the joinder, by the Court, of the proceedings in the two cases. Consequently, Nicaragua asks the Court to modify its Order of 8 March 2011, in particular to allow both Parties (and not only Costa Rica) to dispatch civilian personnel charged with the protection of the environment to the disputed territory (para. 21).

For its part, Costa Rica asserts that no part of the road in question is in the disputed area and considers that the joinder of the proceedings in the case concerning the Construction of a Road in Costa Rica along the San Juan River (Nicaragua v. Costa Rica), introduced by Nicaragua on 21 December 2011 (hereinafter "the Nicaragua v. Costa Rica case"), "does not mean that there is now one proceeding which should be the subject of joint orders". Consequently, it asks the Court to reject Nicaragua's request (para. 22).

Decision of the Court on Nicaragua's request

After examining Nicaragua's first argument, the Court first recalls that, in the Nicaragua v. Costa Rica case, on 19 December 2012, Nicaragua had asked the Court to examine proprio motu whether the circumstances of the case required the indication of provisional measures, and that the Court was of the view that, in March 2013, this was not the case. In addition, the Court finds that the construction of the road, which is at the centre of the Nicaragua v. Costa Rica case, does not have any bearing on the situation addressed in the Order made on 8 March 2011 in the Costa Rica v. Nicaragua case (paras. 26-27).

With regard to Nicaragua's second argument, the Court considers that the joinder of proceedings in the two cases has also not brought about a change in the situation. It explains that that joinder is a procedural step which does not have the effect of rendering applicable ipso facto, to the facts underlying the Nicaragua v. Costa Rica case, the measures prescribed with respect to a specific and separate situation in the first case (para. 28).

The Court therefore considers that Nicaragua may not rely upon a change in the situation within the meaning of Article 76 of the Rules of Court in order to found its request for the modification of the Order of 8 March 2011 (para. 29).

Conclusion of the Order

After examining the requests of the Parties and finding that it could not accede to them, the Court notes nevertheless that "the presence of organized groups of Nicaraguan nationals in the disputed area carries the risk of incidents which might aggravate the present dispute". It adds that that situation is "exacerbated by the limited size of the area and the numbers of Nicaraguan nationals who are regularly present there", and wishes to express "its concerns in this regard" (para. 37).

The Court thus considers it necessary to reaffirm the measures that it indicated in its Order of 8 March 2011, in particular the requirement that the Parties "shall refrain from any action which might aggravate or extend the dispute before the Court or make it more difficult to resolve". It notes that "the actions thus referred to may consist of either acts or omissions". It reminds the Parties once again that "these measures have binding effect . . . and therefore create international legal obligations which each [of them] is required to comply with" (para. 38).

Finally, the Court underlines that its Order of 16 July 2013 is without prejudice as to any finding on the merits concerning the Parties' compliance with its Order of 8 March 2011 (para. 39).

Composition of the Court

The Court was composed as follows: President Tomka; Vice-President Sepúlveda-Amor; Judges Owada, Abraham, Keith, Bennouna, Skotnikov, Cançado Trindade, Yusuf, Greenwood, Xue, Donoghue, Gaja, Sebutinde, Bhandari; Judges ad hoc Guillaume, Dugard; Registrar Couvreur.

Judge Cançado Trindade and Judge ad hoc Dugard have appended their dissenting opinions to the Order of the Court. A summary of those opinions is annexed to this press release.

Full text of the Order and history of the proceedings

The full text of the Order is available on the Court's website in the documentation for each case, under the heading "Contentious cases".

It is recalled that the proceedings in the Costa Rica v. Nicaragua case and in the Nicaragua v. Costa Rica case were joined by the Court on 17 April 2013 "in conformity with the principle of the sound administration of justice and with the need for judicial economy". The history of those proceedings can be found in paragraphs 1 to 11 of the Order of 16 July 2013.

ICJ: Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso/Niger) - The Court nominates experts to assist the Parties in the demarcation of their frontier

Jul 22, http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/149/17476.pdf

THE HAGUE, 22 July 2013. By an Order of 12 July 2013, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, nominated three experts who will assist the Parties in the operation of demarcation of their common frontier in the disputed area, pursuant to Article 7, paragraph 4, of the Special Agreement concluded between the Parties on 24 February 2009 and to paragraph 113 of the Judgment delivered by the Court on 16 April 2013 in the case concerning the Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso/Niger).

The case has thus been completed and has been removed from the Court's List.

ICSID Secretariat has released a new issue of its online publication, ICSID Caseload - Statistics

Jul 31, https://icsid.worldbank.org/ICSID/FrontServlet?requestType=CasesRH&actionVal=OpenPage&PageType=AnnouncementsFrame&FromPage=Announcements&pageName=Announcement133

The ICSID Secretariat has released a new issue of its online publication, the ICSID Caseload - Statistics.

This issue (Issue 2013-2), published in the three official languages of the Centre (English, French and Spanish), contains an overview of the cases registered or otherwise administered by ICSID as of June 30, 2013. The issue features information concerning the basis of consent to ICSID jurisdiction, the geographic distribution of cases by State Party to the dispute, and the economic sectors involved in ICSID cases. It also contains data on outcomes in ICSID arbitration and conciliation proceedings, including further information on disputes decided by arbitral tribunals, data on discontinued ICSID arbitration proceedings, and outcomes to date in annulment proceedings under the ICSID Convention. The nationalities and geographic origins of arbitrators, conciliators and ad hoc committee members appointed in ICSID cases are also featured.

The Secretariat will continue to publish the ICSID Caseload - Statistics on a bi-annual basis reflecting new information as it becomes available. ICSID welcomes any comments or suggestions by email.

ICSID Secretariat Moving to New Offices

Jul 23, https://icsid.worldbank.org/ICSID/FrontServlet?requestType=CasesRH&actionVal=OpenPage&PageType=AnnouncementsFrame&FromPage=Announcements&pageName=Announcement132

The ICSID Secretariat will be relocating to new offices on Friday, August 2, 2013. Correspondence to the Secretariat should be sent as follows:

1. All local messenger deliveries should be made to:

701 18th Street, N.W. (known within the World Bank Group as the J Building), 2nd Floor, Washington, D.C. 20006

2. All other mail and courier/ parcel deliveries to ICSID from outside the Washington, D.C. area should be sent to the following address in order to expedite delivery:

ICSID - The World Bank Group

MSN J2-200

1818 H Street, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20433

U.S.A.

IACHR's amended Rules of Procedure enter into force

Aug 01, http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/media_center/PReleases/2013/057.asp

Washington, D.C. - The amended Rules of Procedure of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) enter into force today, August 1, 2013. The amended Rules of Procedure were approved by the Inter-American Commission in Resolution 1/2013, adopted on March 18, 2013 and published on March 19, 2013.

The amended Rules of Procedure - http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/mandate/Basics/RulesIACHR2013.pdf - are the result of a reform process that the Inter-American Commission undertook between 2011 and 2013. It was a transparent and participatory process that relied on essential input in the form of recommendations and observations presented by the OAS member States, civil society, the victims of human rights violations, members of academia, and other users. This reform process concluded with the Commission's adoption of new policies and practices, the specifics of which are detailed in the text of Resolution 1/2013.

The reform to the Rules aims to perfect the mechanisms at the disposal of the IACHR for fulfilling its mandate of promoting and defending human rights in the Americas. This reform addresses several aspects related to precautionary measures and requests for provisional measures to the Inter-American Court; the petition and case system; the monitoring of country situations; promotion and universality.

The reforms related to precautionary measures seek to increase publicity and dissemination of the criteria for granting, extending, modifying and lifting them, as well as to improve on the mechanisms used by the IACHR to follow-up on measures in force and individualize the respective beneficiaries. The amended Rules set forth in detail the parameters used by the IACHR in the determination of the requisites of urgency, seriousness and irreparable nature, as well as the circumstances in which this organ will request provisional measures to the Inter-American Court.

With respect to the petition and case system, the reforms have the purpose of providing greater predictability and efficacy in the establishment of priorities for the study and admissibility of petitions; criteria for archiving petitions or cases; granting of extensions for compliance with recommendations issued in final merits reports; extension of deadlines for the presentation of observations by parties; and accumulation of the admissibility and merits stages.

As to the monitoring of the situation of countries, promotion and universality, the reforms to the Rules have the goal of improving the content of each of the chapters of the IACHR Annual Report. Starting in 2013, the Report will give an account of the status of ratification of inter-American human rights instruments and inform about the activities carried out by each of the Rapporteurships and Thematic Units. It will also include an evaluation of the situation of human rights in the Hemisphere and of the main trends, advances and challenges to the full enjoyment of civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights in the region. The amended IACHR Rules of Procedure further include a detailed explanation of the methodology, procedure and sources used in the section of the Annual Report that addresses the development of human rights in the region.

The amended Rules of Procedure can be viewed at the webpage of the Commission. To better understand the changes introduced, the following documents are also available: "Amendments to the Rules of Procedure" - http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/mandate/Basics/RulesIACHR2013.pdf - and "Table of Comparison." - http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/mandate/Basics/RulesIACHRcomparative_chart_Aug_2013.pdf

A principal, autonomous body of the Organization of American States (OAS), the IACHR derives its mandate from the OAS Charter and the American Convention on Human Rights. The Inter-American Commission has a mandate to promote respect for human rights in the region and acts as a consultative body to the OAS in this area. The Commission is composed of seven independent members who are elected in an individual capacity by the OAS General Assembly and who do not represent their countries of origin or residence.

Energy Charter: Voting Begins for Candidates Nominated for the Energy Charter Award

Aug 01, http://www.encharter.org/index.php?id=21&id_article=408&L=0

On 1 August 2013 voting began for the first time for candidates nominated for the Energy Charter Award. The Award, instituted in 2013, is designed to give recognition for the exceptional contribution which various individuals and entities have provided to the Energy Charter Process over the years. The nominee with the most votes by 31 October will receive the Award at the next meeting of the Energy Charter Conference, scheduled for December in Nicosia, Cyprus. The Award will consist of a symbolic item and will be presented to the winner by the Minister of Energy, Commerce, Industry and Tourism of Cyprus, the Chairman of the Energy Charter Conference or the Energy Charter Secretary General.

The 2013 nominees for the Energy Charter Award are (in order of nomination): Mr. Ruud Lubbers - author of the Energy Charter initiative, Mr. Ilia Timofte - delegation member, Mr Howard Chase - Chairman of the Charter's Industry Advisory Panel.

Energy Community: Advisory Committee under the Dispute Settlement Procedures becomes operational

Jul 22, http://www.energy-community.org/portal/page/portal/ENC_HOME/NEWS/News_Details?p_new_id=7621

The Advisory Committee established by the Rules of Procedure for Dispute Settlement under the Treaty adopted its internal rules of procedure. With this step, the Committee has become fully operational and is ready to perform the tasks assigned to it.

In cases a dispute settlement procedure is initiated against a Party to the Energy Community for failure to comply with the acquis communautaire, the Treaty envisages that the Ministerial Council takes a decision on the matter. To assist the ministers in taking a decision based on a legal assessment, and to introduce an element of independence in the decision-making process, an Advisory Committee was created in 2008 which is to issue a legal opinion in each case. The Advisory Committee consists of three members. It is chaired by Dr Wolfgang Urbantschitsch, the Head of Legal Department at the Austrian regulatory authority E-Control.

By adopting its internal rules of procedure, the Advisory Committee is now prepared to immediately get involved in cases submitted to the Ministerial Council for decision. In May 2013, the Secretariat of the Energy Community submitted a reasoned request to the Ministerial Council concerning case ECS-8/11 on gas legislation in Bosnia and Herzegovina. This case is the first-ever case to be decided by the Ministerial Council, at its meeting on 24 October this year.

Afghanistan moves to entice foreign investors

Jul 21, http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2013/07/201372113053618886.html

The new policies, which will remain in place for two and a half years, are designed to ease fears that billions of dollars in aid money could dry up and to encourage investors, both foreign and Afghan, to sink money into the economy.

Alba alliance ambitions lay bare Latin trade confusion

Aug 02, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23515979

In the bewildering array of Latin American and Caribbean trade alliances, the left-of-centre Alba group is probably the one that attracts the least attention outside the region.

Argentina pide la recusación de 2 miembros del tribunal de arbitraje sobre YPF

Jul 25, http://economia.elpais.com/economia/2013/07/25/agencias/1374709183_294043.html

Argentina ha pedido la recusación de dos miembros del tribunal de arbitraje sobre el caso de la expropiación de YPF a la española Repsol, según figura en el registro del Centro Internacional de Arreglo de Diferencias Relativas a Inversiones (CIADI) del Banco Mundial.

Australia: Bylong farmer says compulsory arbitration is a costly exercise

Jul 23, http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-23/bylong-farmer-says-compulsory-arbitration-is-a-costly-exercise/4836976

A Bylong Valley farmer says guaranteeing landholders the right to legal representation during 'compulsory arbitration' can end up being a very costly exercise.

Awards: 2013 Mediators Institute of Ireland (MII) Awards for Workplace Mediation

Jul 26, http://www.themii.ie/awards.jsp

In light of the increasing use and scope of mediation, the MII invites organisations to showcase how they have promoted and developed workplace mediation. This is the first opportunity for organisations to achieve public recognition for their commitment to mediation as a key element in their conflict management processes.

There are 6 categories for entry ranging from large companies with over 250 employees to small enterprises with less than 10 employees. Entering is not an onerous task; just fill out the Entry Form online by answering 6 questions and submit it along with any supporting documentation. The closing date is 5pm, Monday, September 30th, 2013.

We wish to acknowledge the support of Industrial Relations News for our initiative.

Bahamas Chamber of Commerce (BCCEC) admitted into the International Chamber of Commerce

Jul 5, http://www.thebahamaschamber.com/_m1714/news/BCCEC-admitted-into-the-ICC

BCCEC admitted into the International Chamber of Commerce

JULY 5, 2013 - The Bahamas Chamber of Commerce and Employers Confederation (BCCEC) achieved another milestone with the organization's recent acceptance into membership of the prestigious International Chamber of Commerce (ICC). As a member of this powerful organization, BCCEC members will gain access to officials at the heart of some of the world's most influential intergovernmental bodies such as the G20 and the United Nations.

In making the announcement, BCCEC Chairman, Chester Cooper remarked, "This is a major accomplishment for our organization and our members. It speaks to the high level of professionalism and ideals of our association that we should be admitted into this very important body. The BCCEC strives to consistently represent Bahamian businesses and is always seeking ways to improve our trade policies and relations. Acceptance into the ICC is one very important step we have taken."

ICC members forge high-level relationships through access to exclusive events open to a network of global companies and receive classified news of developments in international policies that stimulate trade and investments. Members benefit from an exchange of information that enhance business decisions and participate in decision making that shape best practices for global business.

"The access to training, international conferences and skills building opportunities is invaluable," stated Edison Sumner, CEO. " As a local Chamber, many of these opportunities would be unaffordable for our members. Being a member of the ICC gives us the chance to learn from international experts and engage in mutually beneficial exchanges with global brands."

During a recent visit to the ICC in Paris, France Mr. Sumner had the opportunity to meet with executives at the ICC and WCF who pledged their full support behind BCCEC to be established as the National Committee for The Bahamas, a process that has already began in earnest.

Mr. Sumner also met with Mr. Andrea Carlevaris, the Secretary General of the International Court of Arbitration who pledged their support in assisting The Bahamas in establishing their own International Arbitration Centre for Dispute Resolution.

The ICC World Chambers Federation (WCF) was established by ICC in 1951 to be the advocate of its chamber of commerce members worldwide. WCF is a non-political, non-governmental body representing the interests of all local, national, regional, bilateral and transnational chambers of commerce and industry. The BCCEC serves as the premier employers' and business organization in the in The Bahamas by developing, promoting and protecting trade activity as well as the interests of the employers on all social and labour policy issues in national, regional and international forums.

Bangladesh: NBR rejects operators' proposal for international arbitration

Jul 24, http://www.dhakatribune.com/bangladesh/2013/jul/24/nbr-rejects-operators%E2%80%99-proposal-international-arbitration, http://www.dhakatribune.com/bangladesh/2013/jul/24/nbr-rejects-operators%E2%80%99-proposal-international-arbitration

... After the meeting, an NBR official said: "The telecom operators seemed indifferent about ADR. Rather they wanted to go for international arbitration to settle the dispute." The NBR, however, responded in the negative saying there was no scope to go for international arbitration as the dispute was absolutely an internal matter between two parties inside the country, the official said.

Big Law Firms in Trouble: When the Money Dries Up

Jul 21, http://www.newrepublic.com/article/113941/big-law-firms-trouble-when-money-dries

Of all the occupational golden ages to come and go in the twentieth century—for doctors, journalists, ad-men, autoworkers—none lasted longer, felt cushier, and was all in all more golden than the reign of the law partner.

The story that stayed with me most from my colleague Noam Scheiber’s superb cover story on the impending demise of Big Law As We Know It was that of the Mayer Brown associate who, despite apparently being capable enough an attorney to survive nine years on the job—including two earlier rounds of layoffs—got pink-slipped after she had a child and went on maternity leave. “We would have these group meetings where we’d talk about billable hours, how down they were for our group,” she told Noam. “I knew that, if there was another layoff, we were going to be hit.”

Bolivia: REE dice estar "agotando su paciencia" en Bolivia y podría recurrir al arbitraje "en próximos meses"

Jul 24, http://www.eleconomista.es/economia/noticias/5011504/07/13/REE-dice-estar-agotando-su-paciencia-en-Bolivia-y-podria-recurrir-al-arbitraje-en-proximos-meses.html

El presidente de Red Eléctrica de España (REE), José Folgado, advierte de que la compañía está "agotando su paciencia" ante la ausencia de propuestas de indemnización por parte del Gobierno boliviano que se acerquen al valor estimado por la compañía para su filial Transportadora de Electricidad (Tde), expropiada el año pasado.

Brazil enacts anti-bribery law required by OECD

Aug 02, http://www.buenosairesherald.com/article/137532/brazil-enacts-antibribery-law-required-by-oecd

Bribing a public official in Brazil could become a very onerous mistake for local and foreign businesses under a law enacted that for the first time makes companies liable for bribes paid by their employees.

Canada-EU Trade Negotiators Draw Up “Break-Out Package” on Outstanding Issues

Aug 02, http://blogs.wsj.com/canadarealtime/2013/08/02/canada-eu-trade-negotiators-draw-up-break-out-package-on-outstanding-issues/

Trade negotiators for Canada and the European Union have drawn up a proposal they hope will bridge the differences that are blocking a free trade deal after more than four years of talks, according to people familiar with the matter.

Canada: Federal government agrees to binding arbitration in foreign service job dispute

Jul 23, http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Federal+government+agrees+binding+arbitration+foreign/8696683/story.html

OTTAWA - The federal government says it is willing to settle its dispute with Canada's striking foreign-service workers through binding arbitration - subject to certain conditions.

Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) CCJ DELIVERS JUDGMENT IN MATTER BCB HOLDINGS LTD, THE BELIZE BANK LTD. V. THE AG OF BELIZE

Jul 26, http://www.caribbeancourtofjustice.org/news/ccj-delivers-reserved-judgment-in-bcb-ltd-belize-bank-v-the-ag-of-belize

CCJ, Port of Spain. The Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) today declined to enforce an arbitral Award made by The London Court of International Arbitration ("the Tribunal").

The Award had ordered the State of Belize to pay to two Belizean Companies damages and costs totaling approximately US $44M with interest at 3.38% compounded annually. The Award arose out of an agreement between the Government and the Companies that was recorded in a Deed executed by representatives of the Companies on the one hand and the Prime Minister (as Minister of Finance) and the Attorney General of Belize on the other. The Companies were seeking to have the Award enforced in Belize under the 1980 Arbitration Act.

The CCJ rejected the Attorney General's submissions that the Arbitration Act was unconstitutional but the Court upheld the argument that the Award was illegal, void and contrary to public policy. The Court stated that the Deed purported to alter and regulate taxation and under the Belize Constitution and statutes this could only validly be done by parliament.

The Court stated that to allow the Minister of Finance to assume essential law-making functions beyond his constitutional or legislative authority would put democracy at peril. Caribbean courts therefore have an obligation to strike down executive action that undermines the authority of the legislature.

In deciding the issue of costs, the Court found that given the Government's refusal to participate in the arbitration proceedings, as well as the Companies' success on the arguments raised on the constitutionality of the Arbitration Ordinance each party should bear its own costs.

The Court was presided over by the President Sir Dennis Byron along with Justices Saunders, Bernard, Wit and Anderson. Messrs Edward Fitzgerald QC, Eamon Courtenay QC and Ms Ashanti Arthurs-Martin appeared for the Companies. Messrs Michael Young QC, Ms Magalie Perdomo and Ms Iliana Swift appeared for the Attorney General.

The full judgment of the Court is available on the CCJ's website.

Centerra Gold: update on Negotiations between Kyrgyz Republic and Centerra

Jul 31, http://www.centerragold.com/sites/default/files/news-releases-en/cg-07312013-en-02.pdf

As previously disclosed, the Kyrgyz Republic Parliament passed resolution #2805 on February 21, 2013, which, among other things, recommended that the Kyrgyz Government conduct consultations and negotiations with Centerra to find mutually acceptable solutions with respect to the Kumtor Project and the issues raised in the Parliamentary and State Commission reports. The resolution set a deadline of June 1, 2013 for the Government to return to the Parliament with information on how to implement the Parliament's recommendations in the resolution. This deadline of June 1, 2013 was extended by Parliament by way of a resolution dated June 5, 2013 (Resolution #3169-V). The original deadline of June 1, 2013 was extended for three months, and Parliament set a deadline of September 10, 2013 for the Government to present final agreements incorporating the mutually acceptable solution. Resolution #3169-V also provides that if a mutually acceptable solution has not been agreed to, the Government is instructed to develop and submit a draft law "On Denunciation of the Agreement for the Kumtor Project" for review by the Kyrgyz Republic Parliament.

The Company continues to discuss outstanding matters with the Kyrgyz Republic advisory working group, which includes Prime Minister Satybaldiev, and with the Kyrgyz Republic financial and legal experts. As previously disclosed, the Company is in discussions with the Kyrgyz Republic Government regarding a potential restructuring transaction under which Kyrgyzaltyn JSC would exchange its 32.7% equity interest in Centerra for an interest of equivalent value in a joint venture company that would own the Kumtor Project. Discussions are on-going and any definitive agreement for a potential restructuring would be subject to compliance with all applicable legal and regulatory requirements and approvals, including any independent valuation and minority shareholder approval requirements. Centerra expects to continue discussions with the Government with the objective of resolving matters through constructive dialogue. However, there can be no assurance that any transaction will be consummated or that the Company will be able to successfully resolve any of the matters currently affecting the Kumtor Project. The inability to successfully resolve matters, including obtaining all necessary approvals, and/or further actions of the Kyrgyz Republic Government and/or Parliament, could have a material adverse impact on the Company's future cash flows, earnings, results of operations and financial conditions.

Clayton Utz: Commercial arbitration to bridge Middle East divide

Aug 02, http://www.lawyersweekly.com.au/news/commercial-arbitration-to-bridge-middle-east-divid

On Tuesday (30 July), former judge and ABC chairman, the Hon. James Spigelman, chaired a panel of legal and commercial experts from Israel and Palestine who have been instrumental in the development of the Jerusalem Arbitration Center (JAC).

CME BV - Video International Company Group, CGSC

Aug 01, http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/925645/000092564513000028/R25.htm

Video International Termination

On March 18, 2009, Video International Company Group, CGSC ("VI"), a Russian legal entity, filed a claim in the London Court of International Arbitration ("LCIA") against our wholly-owned subsidiary CME BV, which was, at the time the claim was filed, the principal holding company of our former Ukrainian operations. The claim relates to the termination of an agreement between VI and CME BV dated November 30, 2006 (the "parent agreement"), which was one of four related contracts by which VI subsidiaries, including LLC Video International-Prioritet ("Prioritet"), supplied advertising and marketing services to Studio 1+1 LLC ("Studio 1+1") and certain affiliates. Following the termination of these agreements on March 24, 2009, Studio 1+1 was required to pay a termination penalty. On June 1, 2009, Studio 1+1 paid UAH 13.5 million (approximately US$ 1.6 million) to Prioritet and set off UAH 7.4 million (approximately US$ 0.9 million) against amounts owing to Studio 1+1 under the advertising and marketing services agreements. In its LCIA claim, VI sought payment of a separate indemnity from CME BV under the parent agreement of US$ 58.5 million. On September 30, 2010, a partial award was issued in the arbitration proceedings, pursuant to which VI's claim for relief in the amount of US$ 58.5 million was dismissed. The partial award does permit VI to bring a subsequent claim against CME BV as parent guarantor in the event that VI establishes that it is entitled to certain additional compensation under the advertising and marketing services agreements with Studio 1+1 and that such compensation is not satisfied by Studio 1+1. On July 13, 2011, Prioritet filed claims against Studio 1+1 in the Commercial Court of Kiev relating to alleged violations of the advertising services agreement and marketing services agreement and sought relief of approximately UAH 201.0 million (approximately US$ 24.5 million). On September 23, 2011, the Commercial Court of Kiev dismissed Prioritet's claims. On November 7, 2011, the Commercial Court of Appeal of Kiev dismissed an appeal by Prioritet of the lower court's decision. On December 13, 2011, the Superior Commercial Court of Ukraine dismissed an appeal of Prioritet following the decision of the appellate court. On June 5, 2012, the Superior Commercial Court of Ukraine denied Prioritet's request to appeal to the Supreme Court of Ukraine. On June 18, 2012, Prioritet filed a claim against Studio 1+1 in the Commercial Court of Kiev that alleges violations of one of the advertising and marketing services agreements and seeks relief of approximately UAH 42.3 million (approximately US$ 5.2 million). On September 7, 2012, the Commercial Court of Kiev dismissed Prioritet's claims. On October 31, 2012, the Commercial Court of Appeal of Kiev dismissed Prioritet's appeal of the lower court's decision. On March 26, 2013, the Superior Commercial Court of Ukraine denied an appeal by Prioritet following the decision of the appellate court. In addition, on September 28, 2012, VI filed a further claim in the LCIA against CME BV, alleging CME BV owes approximately US$ 4.0 million under the partial award as an indemnity payment VI claims Prioritet is owed from Studio 1+1 in connection with the termination of the advertising and marketing services agreements between Studio 1+1 and Prioritet. On May 15, 2013, a final award was issued in the arbitration proceedings, pursuant to which VI's claim of approximately US$ 4.0 million was dismissed. This award is not subject to appeal.

Colombia vows no Nicaraguan oil exploration in disputed Caribbean area

Aug 02, http://www.platts.com/latest-news/oil/bogota-colombia/colombia-vows-no-nicaraguan-oil-exploration-in-21368833

Colombian president Juan Manuel Santos on Thursday reiterated the implied threat contained in a diplomatic note sent by his foreign minister, Maria Angela Holguin, on Wednesday that Colombia would stop any offshore exploration.

Colombia: Senator Considers Colombia-EU FTA Harmful, Illegal

Aug 01, http://www.plenglish.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1729261&Itemid=1

Aug 1 (Prensa Latina) The Colombia-European Union (EU) FTA will be as damaging to the country as the one signed with U.S., asserted here Senator Jorge Enrique Robledo, who called the agreement illegal and a violation of the Constitution.

The government of President Santos violated the Constitution by allowing the entry into force of that Treaty, without the review by the Constitutional Court, pointed out the congressman in a communiqué spread on its website.

Cuba: Max Marambio ganó juicio internacional contra empresa cubana (17.5US$ million)

Jul 26, http://www.lanacion.cl/max-marambio-gano-juicio-internacional-contra-empresa-cubana/noticias/2013-07-26/115144.html

La Corte Internacional de Arbitraje (CIA) condenó a la empresa estatal cubana Coralsa a pagar una indemnización de US$17.523.095 a la compañía Ingelco, del empresario chileno Max Marambio, por no colaborar en el proceso de liquidación de la productora de alimentos Río Zaza, en la cual ambas partes eran socios (50% cada una).

Côte d'Ivoire deposits the declaration allowing individuals direct access to African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights

Jul 31, http://www.african-court.org/en/index.php/news/latest-news/426-the-republic-of-cote-d-ivoire-deposits-the-declaration-allowing-individuals-and-ngos-direct-access-to-the-african-court

Arusha, 31 July 2013: The Republic of Côte d'Ivoire has deposited the declaration required under Article 34 (6) of the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights, accepting the competence of the Court to receive cases from individuals and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) with observer status before the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights.

Article 34(6) of the Protocol provides that 'at the time of the ratification of the Protocol or any time thereafter, the State shall make a declaration accepting the competence of the Court to receive cases under article 5(3) of this Protocol. The Court shall not receive any petition under article 5(3) involving a State Party which has not made such a declaration'.

According to a letter from the Office of the Legal Counsel of the African Union Commision (AUC), the declaration was deposited at the AUC on 23 July 2013. By depositing the declaration, the Republic of Côte d'Ivoire has accepted the jurisdiction of the Court over petitions filed against the Republic of Côte d'Ivoire by individuals and/or NGOs, subject to the reservation that all local remedies will have been exhausted before the national competent organs.

Côte d'Ivoire ratified the Protocol 10 years ago, but individuals and/or NGOs could not directly institute cases before the Court, because the country had not made the declaration.

It is worth mentioning that Côte d'Ivoire deposited the declaration only two months after delegation of the Court, led by its President, Hon. Lady Justice Sophia A-B. Akuffo, visited the country and met with some high ranking officials in Cote d'Ivoire, including the Prime Minister, His Excellency Daniel Kablan Duncan, and the Minister of Justice and Keeper of the Seals, Mr Gnenema Mamadou Coulibaly, who promised that the declaration would be made before the end of the year 2013.

The declaration from the Republic of Côte d'Ivoire was signed by the State Minister, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Côte d'Ivoire, Mr Charles Koffi Dibby, on 19 June 2013. Côte d'Ivoire is the seventh country (out of the 26 States Parties to the Protocol) to deposit the declaration, after Burkina Faso, Ghana, Malawi, Mali, Rwanda and Tanzania.

Death to "Profit Per Partner" - Jordan Furlong

Jul 31, http://www.law21.ca/2013/07/death-to-profit-per-partner/

It's time for law firms to junk "average Profit Per Partner" (PPP) as a measure of profitability and success. Past time, actually: our continued adherence to this shallow and self-centred metric is a prime contributor to the BigLaw existential crisis we've been reading so much about lately. By using PPP as the primary (if not the only) criterion by which to assess our law firms' health, we perpetuate a host of self-destructive habits and impair our ability to operate our law firms in a truly profitable and professional manner.

Diverse International coalition launches alternative process to secretive Trans-Pacific Partnership talks

Jul 24, http://openmedia.org/news/diverse-international-coalition-launches-alternative-process-secretive-trans-pacific

The Fair Deal Coalition has launched a new initiative that will give Internet users a platform to discuss what copyright should look like under the TPP. The Coalition's 'Your Digital Future' tool invites stakeholders from all sectors - not just old media conglomerates - to discuss what kind of copyright law the TPP countries need in order to encourage creativity, participation, and innovation. The Fair Deal Coalition will take this wide-ranging feedback and bring it directly to TPP decision-makers, ensuring that the voices of the broader Internet community are heard.

"Your Digital Future" is a crowdsourcing initiative, hosted at http://OpenMedia.org/DigitalFuture. This new tool will be used to gather input from citizens and businesses on what they think today's copyright laws should be, and what they think their digital future should look like.

Society at large should have a say in the important laws that shape our use of the Internet, how we access information, and even conduct business. This initiative seeks to correct the stark imbalance in the TPP talks between the interests of old media conglomerates and the rest of society including citizens, Internet users, innovative businesses, and creators, giving the latter a voice in the discussion.

The announcement comes as TPP negotiators wrap up their latest round of closed-door meetings in Malaysia. Leaked documents [pdf] show that copyright terms in the TPP could actually render many basic online activities illegal, hinder innovation, and cost us money. The copyright demands in the TPP would never pass with the world watching, which is why the negotiations are secret.

What Fair Deal Coalition members have to say about Your Digital Future:

OpenMedia.org Executive Director Steve Anderson said today, "The TPP is being negotiated in secret. With the Your Digital Future tool we're beginning to build a Trans-Pacific Partnership of our own - a diverse network of civil society, businesses, creators, innovators, consumers, technologists, and educators. We aim to model what a 21st century multi-stakeholder policy process should look like, in contrast to the near-total secrecy around the TPP talks."

Francisco Vera Hott from ONG Derechos Digitales, Chile: "While there is a growing demand for transparency and inclusiveness in public policy making, the TPP Agreement is being discussed under a level of secrecy that doesn't allow people to even know its contents, and much less be part of those discussions. We need new tools like this to get people involved in the debate by enabling them to join discussions where the public interest is at stake".

Jeremy Malcolm from Consumers International: "It is frustrating both for us and the negotiators that even when we meet with them, we can't have a real discussion. We spend a lot of time talking about problems with the leaked draft, but it's two years old now. Who knows whether the problems with the current text are the same? We may be wasting our time here and not even realise it. The open process that we're using for Your Digital Future couldn't be more different."

Maira Sutton from the Electronic Frontier Foundation: "Hollywood and other content interests are using TPP to push forth an extreme copyright agenda around the world. The IP policies they're lobbying for in TPP will permanently affect our rights to free expression, privacy, and innovation online. For this TPP to ever be relevant or legitimate throughout the 21st century, the public's voice must be heard and our collective concerns must be addressed."

Trish Hepworth from the Australian Digital Alliance remarks "The Internet has profoundly changed the way we create, access, and disseminate culture, and we need to have an open discussion about how copyright law can support creation and access to culture in the digital era. This is what this project aims to do - collecting voices from diverse sectors and countries and creating a productive conversation. It stands in stark contrast to the TPP which seeks to impose an IP regime that is negotiated in secret as part of a trade deal."

Burcu Kilic from Public Citizen: " There seems to be a lack of communication between the United States Trade Representative (USTR) and the United States Copyright office. The Copyright office is concerned over the current state of aged copyright laws and is calling for sweeping reform, yet the USTR is insisting on implementing these inadequate regulations on a global scale through the TPP. The leaked TPP text shows that the USTR is mandating that TPP signatory countries implement copyright provisions that the U.S. Copyright Office realizes are not adequate to the new developments in technology. This must be taken as an implied message to TPP contracting parties that these copyright provisions are controversial for everyone involved, including the U.S. itself."

Susan Chalmers from Internet New Zealand: "Ironically, if the TPP copyright chapter was open for public discussion, countries would probably end up with better legal standards for their citizens -- ones that support innovation and economic growth, access to information, and make less of an intrusion into how we use and build the Internet. The idea behind Your Digital Future is to have that public discussion, whether invited or not. Now, TPP decision-makers will know how their constituents feel."

The Fair Deal Coalition is made up of a diverse group of public interest and business organizations across the Pacific region along with thousands of people who are concerned about costly and harmful Internet censorship rules being imposed through the TPP.

About the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement:

The TPP is one of the most far-reaching international free trade agreements in history. We know from leaked TPP draft texts that participating nations would be bound to much stricter and more extreme copyright laws than now exist under current national laws. These new rules would criminalize much online activity, invade citizens' privacy, and significantly impact our ability to share and collaborate online.

Negotiators from 12 of the TPP negotiating nations-Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Peru, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Singapore, Vietnam, and the United States-met in Malaysia to discuss these changes without input from the public, creators, or most businesses. The negotiating documents are classified-unless you are one of just 600 industry lobbyists permitted to participate.

TPP meetings took place in Malaysia from July 15th to the 24th. Negotiators have indicated that they are in the "home stretch", with leaders of the participating countries expecting a resolution sometime in October. However, reports have indicated that the intellectual property provisions have been quite a "challenging" issue for those behind the agreement.

Over 15,000 people have now signed a petition at http://OurFairDeal.org, which demands that negotiators reject copyright proposals that would restrict the open Internet, access to knowledge, economic opportunity and our fundamental rights.

Internet users around the world can tell decision-makers that it's time to open up their secretive process and let our voices be heard by speaking out at www.OpenMedia.org/DigitalFuture.

Dow Chemical 2nd-Quarter Net Surges on Arbitration Award; Sales Flat

Jul 25, http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20130725-713543.html

Dow, the largest U.S. chemical producer by revenue, benefited in the second quarter from a payment of $2.2 billion for damages--one of the largest ever from a corporate arbitration--from Petrochemical Industries Company of Kuwait, after the state-owned firm backed out of the K-Dow joint-venture deal it agreed to in 2008. That payment helped Dow post profits despite overall revenues coming in at $14.58 billion, only 0.4% higher than the year before.

Eni Starts Arbitration with Statoil Over Gas-Supply Contracts

Aug 02, http://english.capital.gr/News.asp?id=1846674

ROME--Eni SpA (E), Italy's biggest energy company by market value, said it started an arbitration process with Statoil ASA (STO) over contracts for the long-term supply of natural gas from the Norwegian oil company after it managed to renegotiate deals with some of its biggest suppliers earlier this year.

EU Trade deal with Honduras, Nicaragua and Panama becomes operational

Aug 02, http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-13-758_en.htm

As of 1 August 2013, the EU – on one side - and Honduras, Nicaragua and Panama - on the other - will start applying the trade part of an Association Agreement signed in 2012. The agreement will open up markets and create a stable business and investment relation with our Central American partners.

The aim of this agreement is also to reinforce economic integration and promote sustainable development in the region. The EU looks forward to the moment when provisional application will be effective with all six Central American countries.

'This Association Agreement is another proof of our interest and involvement in Central America,' said EU Trade Commissioner Karel De Gucht. 'It will further cement our strategic alliance based on common values and mutual respect. The benefits are not just economic: as European unification has shown, economic integration has a positive impact on political integration, so this agreement should bring more stability to the region. I am glad that Honduras, Nicaragua and Panama are now taking a step in this direction and I am looking forward to seeing other partners in the region joining in very soon.'

The comprehensive trade part of this agreement will open up markets for goods, public procurement, services and investment on both sides. This will create a stable business and investment environment based on predictable and enforceable trade rules which, in many instances, go further than the commitments the parties have made in the World Trade Organisation (WTO).

The agreement also sets up institutions to tackle trade related issues and provides a transparent way to settle trade disputes. The trade part of the agreement includes far-reaching provisions guaranteeing the protection of human rights, as well as commitments on labour standards and environmental protection that will underpin sustainable development.

The benefits of the agreement at a macroeconomic level are expected to be considerably more tangible for the Central American countries. This is due to the relative size of the economies involved with Central American GDP representing less than 1% of the European GDP. Central America's economy is expected to grow by over two and a half billion euros annually once the agreement applies to the entire region.

Background

The EU is Central America's second largest trading partner. In 2012, the total trade flows in goods amounted to €14 billion, including almost €1.4 billion worth of trade with Honduras, €1.2 billion with Panama and €0.4 billion with Nicaragua.

The Central American countries export mostly agricultural and fisheries products (coffee, bananas, pineapples, sugar and seafood) as well as some industrial products (microchips, medical and optical instruments). The EU exports mainly pharmaceutical products, petroleum oil, cars and machinery.

The Association Agreement contains three pillars - political dialogue, cooperation, and trade - aimed at supporting economic growth, democracy and political stability in Central America. Pending the completion of ratification procedures by the 28 EU Member States, only the trade pillar will apply. However, during the period of this provisional application, companies can already benefit from all the trade preferences set out in the agreement.

For more information

Full text of the Trade Agreement http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=689

Memo: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-11-429_en.htm

EU: Statement on the negotiations with Bosnia and Herzegovina on the bilateral trade regime after the accession of Croatia to the EU

Aug 01, http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-13-736_en.htm

The European Commission regrets the continuous stalemate in the negotiations with Bosnia and Herzegovina on the bilateral trade regime after the accession of Croatia to the EU.

In the current negotiations on the adaptation of the EU-Bosnia and Herzegovina Stabilisation and Association Agreement (SAA) and its Interim Agreement in light of Croatia's accession to the EU, Bosnia and Herzegovina continues to refuse the methodology of the EU. This methodology consists of a purely technical adaptation of the bilateral trade of the EU with Bosnia and Herzegovina in order to take into account the traditional trade of the country with Croatia under the Central European Free Trade Agreement (CEFTA).

The methodology means that trade concessions applicable to the EU with 27 Member States are adjusted by the trade flows of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia in order to reflect the situation of the enlarged EU-28. If, for instance, for a given product quotas of 1,000 tonnes have existed under the SAA/Interim Agreement for which no customs duties are to be paid and if the traditional trade of Bosnia and Herzegovina with Croatia under CEFTA has been 100 tonnes, the new quotas of this product after technical adaptation would be 1.100 tonnes with regard to the EU-28, still duty-free.

This shows that the adaptation is of a purely mathematical nature to help maintaining the trade conditions. Fundamental changes to the concessions and duties would disturb the regional markets, which have grown during the last years. They would impact negatively on the existing bilateral trade of Bosnia and Herzegovina with the EU. Trading partners count on reliable trade conditions.

The EU methodology was accepted by all countries that have applied for EU membership. All Western Balkans countries have accepted this methodology – with the exception of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Bosnia and Herzegovina requires instead a principle review of the existing trade concessions arguing amongst others that the country had suffered from the free market area under the CEFTA.

Trade between the EU and Bosnia and Herzegovina is governed since the signature of the SAA and its Interim Agreement in 2008 by an asymmetric trade liberalisation, very much in favour of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The country benefitted from the very beginning of an almost completely free access to the EU market, whereas trade concessions on products of EU origin were implemented only progressively and customs duties still apply to certain products.

In fact, Bosnia and Herzegovina can export freely to the EU all categories of products. Only sugar, wine, fish and baby beef are subject to specific quotas beyond which duties are to be paid by Bosnia and Herzegovina for the export to the EU.

Since no agreement has been reached so far on the SAA adaptation, Bosnia and Herzegovina imposes now substantial import duties on agricultural products from Croatia, in particular on milk and certain meat and meat products, which were fully liberalised before 1 July 2013.

The European Commission regrets the current attitude of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which is not in line with the spirit of bilateral free trade as it is provided for in the SAA and the Interim Agreement. The effective establishment of bilateral free trade is one of the cornerstones on a country's path to EU membership. The current attitude is a step backwards.

The Commission takes note of the recent statement by the head of the negotiating team of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Dragiša Mekic, who asked for reciprocity in these negotiations. The Commission would agree to the principle of reciprocity which would require the country to provide to the EU the same level of concessions that the EU is granting today to Bosnia and Herzegovina for all products set out in the bilateral agreement. However, in consideration of the fragile economy of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Commission has never requested the country – and in particular not under the current negotiations - to immediately achieve a symmetrical full trade liberalisation.

The current attitude of Bosnia and Herzegovina to protect its domestic market will delay the establishment of a common free trade area with the EU made by 28 Member States. Consumers in Bosnia and Herzegovina will have to pay higher prices for products that were traditionally imported from Croatia.

EU: The EU's bilateral trade and investment agreements – where are we?

Aug 01, http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-13-734_en.htm

Over the next years, 90% of world demand will be generated outside the EU. That is why it is a key priority for the EU to open up more market opportunities for European business by negotiating new Free Trade Agreements with key countries. If we were to complete all our current free trade talks tomorrow, we would add 2.2% to the EU's GDP or €275 billion. This is equivalent of adding a country as big as Austria or Denmark to the EU economy. In terms of employment, these agreements could generate 2.2 million new jobs or additional 1% of the EU total workforce. Below is an overview of the most important on-going and forthcoming free trade negotiations.

...

France: Gazprom Faces Arbitration With Edison After Ruling on RWE Price

Jul 30, http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-07-30/gazprom-faces-arbitration-with-edison-after-ruling-on-rwe-price

OAO Gazprom (GAZP), the Russian gas exporter forced to revise contracts with RWE AG (RWE) last month, is set for further legal wrangles after Electricite de France SA’s Italian unit initiated arbitration proceedings.

Georgia-EU free trade talks end with progress on agreement

Jul 23, http://www.euronews.com/2013/07/23/georgia-eu-free-trade-talks-end-with-progress-on-agreement/

The Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA) is part of the Association Agreement that will lead to closer political association and economic integration between the former Soviet nation and Europe.

Ghana: Chief Justice lauds ADR mechanism

Jul 29, http://vibeghana.com/2013/07/29/chief-justice-lauds-adr-mechanism/

georgina woodThe Chief Justice Georgina Theodora Wood has lauded the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) concept and recommended the sustenance of the mechanism for civil and commercial dispute resolution in the country.

Harper Government Advances Canada’s Priorities in Trans-Pacific Partnership Negotiations

Jul 25, http://www.international.gc.ca/media/comm/news-communiques/2013/07/25a.aspx?lang=eng

“Our government is committed to creating new opportunities for Canada’s exporters in the fast-growing and dynamic Asia-Pacific region,” said Minister Fast. “An ambitious TPP agreement will open markets and create jobs for Canadians in every region of our country.”

Highlights of the trade pillar of the Association Agreement between Central America and the European Union

Jul 20, http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-11-429_en.htm

A transparent way to settle trade disputes

The Trade pillar of the Association Agreement between the EU and Central America includes an efficient and streamlined dispute settlement system in accordance with the principles that the EU considers to be most important such as transparency (open hearings and amicus curiae briefs) and sequencing (no right to impose retaliation until such time as non-compliance is verified). A mediation mechanism for non-tariff barriers is also foreseen.

India Could Set Preconditions For Investment Treaty With US During Vice President Joe Biden’s Visit, While US Businesses Cry Foul Over India’s Policies

Jul 23, http://www.ibtimes.com/india-could-set-preconditions-investment-treaty-us-during-vice-president-joe-bidens-visit-while-us

India spelt out preconditions for a bilateral investment treaty with the U.S., asserting that the Indian judiciary would be the final authority in disputes involving American businesses, who would not be allowed to invoke sovereign guarantees, underlining the Indian government’s cautious approach in forging closer ties with the U.S., the Economic Times reported, citing senior officials.

India, Israel negotiating FTA

Jul 24, http://www.thehindu.com/business/Economy/india-israel-negotiating-fta/article4945898.ece

Israel is negotiating with India the contours of a Free Trade Agreement (FTA), said Eli Belotsercovsky, Director of Economic Relations with India and China in the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Tuesday. However, Mr. Belotsercovsky refused to spell out a timeframe in which the negotiations, which have been on for more than a year, would conclude.

India-Swiss FTA likely by 2015

Aug 05, http://newindianexpress.com/business/Indo-Swiss-FTA-likely-by-2015/2013/08/05/article1718815.ece

A Free-Trade Agreement between India and Switzerland, which is currently under negotiations, could materialise some time in 2015, said Deputy Head of Mission of the Embassy of Switzerland, Martin Strub.

India: Government to examine if FTA's have delivered: Minister

Jul 25, http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2013-07-25/news/40795246_1_ptas-pilot-project-trade-agreements

"We did enter into FTAs and PTAs (Preferential Trade Agreements) with many countries. But again whether these FTAs and PTAs have really delivered is something that we need to very closely look at, which the government intends to do.

India: Moily has junked arbitration to help Reliance, Dasgupta tells court

Jul 29, http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/moily-has-junked-arbitration-to-help-reliance-dasgupta-tells-court/article4966030.ece

The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice to the Centre, Petroleum Minister M. Veerappa Moily and Reliance Industries Limited (RIL) on a public interest litigation petition challenging the government's decision to double the price to $8.4 per million British thermal unit (mmBtu) for gas produced from the KG basin.

India: RIL to move Supreme Court for arbitrator in KG-D6 case

Jul 18, http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2013-07-18/news/40657476_1_kg-d6-ril-board-ril-officials

NEW DELHI: Reliance Industries Ltd (RIL) is likely to ask the Supreme Court to appoint a presiding judge for an arbitration panel set up to hear a case initiated by the Mukesh Ambani-helmed company in April 2012 over its right to recover production costs for investments made in the Krishna Godavari basin.

India: Supreme Court asks Australian firm to pay Rs 940 cr as damages to SAIL

Aug 06, http://www.financialexpress.com/news/sc-asks-australian-firm-to-pay-rs-940-cr-as-damages-to-sail/1151524

The Steel Authority of India (SAIL) received a shot in the arm with the Supreme Court (SC) on Monday refusing to interfere with the foreign arbitration award that asked two Australian coal firms to pay damages of $159 million (R940 crore) to the PSU.

India: Vodafone doesn’t want tax talks under Indian law; seeks neutral authority

Aug 05, http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/news-by-industry/telecom/vodafone-doesnt-want-tax-talks-under-indian-law-seeks-neutral-authority-like-uncitral/articleshow/21608719.cms

NEW DELHI: British telecom major Vodafone is not in favour of holding conciliation talks with India over its Rs 20,000-crore withholding tax dispute under Indian jurisdiction, but instead has proposed they be held under a neutral authority, a person familiar with the matter said.

Intrepid Mines Ltd in the process of finalizing a Notice of Arbitration - Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC)

Jul 31, http://intrepidmines.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/130730-Management-Discussion-and-Analysis.pdf

CORPORATE

Concerted efforts to protect and enforce Intrepid's rights to an 80% interest in Tujuh Bukit:

...

Iran refutes reports on talks with Moscow over "Antey-2500" complex

Aug 01, http://www.azernews.az/region/57634.html

Iran has filed a complaint against Rosoboronexport in the International Court of Arbitration in Geneva.

Iran: Ahmadinejad appointed to Iran’s top political arbitration body

Aug 06, http://news.tj/en/news/ahmadinejad-appointed-iran-s-top-political-arbitration-body

August 6, 2013, Asia-Plus -- Iran's supreme leader yesterday appointed Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to the Expediency Council, the country's top political arbitration body.

Israel Chemicals delays publishing arbitration minutes

Jul 29, http://www.globes.co.il/serveen/globes/docview.asp?did=1000866321&fid=942

Two weeks after the Jerusalem District Court for Administrative Affairs ordered Israel Chemicals Ltd. (TASE: ICL) to publish the minutes of the arbitration hearings on its royalties to the state, the company has filed an urgent motion with the court to delay publication, in order to appeal the ruling to the Supreme Court.

Israel: Gadot Chemical Tankers wins $80m international arbitration

Jul 29, http://www.globes.co.il/serveen/globes/docview.asp?did=1000866300&fid=942

The sale of Gadot Chemical Terminals and Tankers Ltd. by Israel Discount Bank (TASE: DSCT) will be able to move forward, after the London Maritime Arbitration Association ruled in the company's favor in the hearing against a Chinese shipyard from which it ordered four ships in 2007. The arbitration awarded Gadot $80 million, which it will receive in a few weeks, and which will reduce its debt and boost its value.

Israel: Optibase Ltd. Announces Arbitration Award

Aug 01, http://finance.yahoo.com/news/optibase-ltd-announces-arbitration-award-130000919.html

Optibase Ltd. (OBAS) ("Optibase") today announced that after a long dispute and arbitration proceedings conducted between Optibase, S.A. Vitec ("Vitec") and Vitec's attorney, in connection with the sale of Optibase's Video Solutions Business in July 2010, an arbitration award was given by the arbitrator on July 30, 2013, ordering Optibase to pay Vitec an aggregate amount of approximately $550,000 (the original amount claimed by Vitec in the arbitration proceedings was approximately $24 million). Such awarded amounts include approximately $45,000 to be paid to Vitec's attorney in connection with a personal claim raised by him. The amounts awarded to Vitec will be off-set from amounts that are currently held in escrow. The remaining escrow amounts will be released to Optibase. Optibase has adequate provisions in its financial statements in connection with the said arbitration proceedings.

Japan Commercial Arbitration Association Information Call for Public Comments on the Draft Amendments to the Commercial Arbitration Rules

Aug 02, http://www.jcaa.or.jp/e/information/2013/08/02/call_for_public_comments_on_th.html

EMAIL: arbitration@jcaa.or.jp

4. Available Download:

Lithuania offers end to lawsuits as horse trading with Gazprom begins

Aug 6, http://www.bne.eu/storyf5252/Lithuania_offers_end_to_lawsuits_as_horse_trading_with_Gazprom_begins

Vilnius has offered Moscow a deal in which it will end litigation and an investigation into management at Lietuvos Dujos - in which Gazprom owns a 37% stake. The Lithuanian government is also offering to drop a LTL5bn (€1.4bn) claim in a Stockholm arbitration court in exchange for a reduction in gas prices, Baltic News Service reported on August 5.

Make Singapore hub for IP dispute cases: Indranee

Jul 31, http://www.singaporelawwatch.sg/slw/headlinesnews/28611-make-spore-hub-for-ip-dispute-cases-indranee.html

"This is a good time to position ourselves as a hub for IP dispute resolution by establishing a panel of top international IP arbitrators in Singapore to enhance the international profile of our IP arbitration capabilities, and attract more IP-related cases."

Malaysia: Arbitrator claims trial to deceiving KLRCA director

Jul 25, http://www.nst.com.my/latest/arbitrator-claims-trial-to-deceiving-klrca-director-1.326673

KUALA LUMPUR: A chartered arbitrator claimed trial in the Sessions Court here today to deceiving the director of the Kuala Lumpur Regional Centre for Arbitration (KLRCA) three years ago.

Malaysia: Arbitrator Yusof Holmes charged with making false declaration

Jul 25, http://www.thestar.com.my/News/Nation/2013/07/25/arbitrator-Yusof-Holmes-Abdullah-two-charges-fales-declaration.aspx

He claimed trial to deceiving KLRCA with a false statement of independence, thus intentionally leading the centre's director to appoint him as arbitrator in a dispute between two companies, and to an alternative charge of knowingly falsifying the statement of independence.

Malaysia: IP Rights chapter of TPP far from final, says ministry

Aug 02, http://www.themalaymailonline.com/tech-gadgets/article/ip-rights-chapter-of-tpp-far-from-final-says-ministry

The Intellectual Property (IP) Rights chapter of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement is far from being finalised.

“It is one of the largest and more complex chapters and we have a lot of catching up to do to reach a state of consensus in the negotiations, compared with other sections in the agreement,” said Burhan Irwan Cheong, lead IP negotiator for the Malaysian TPP negotiating team.

Maldives: Axis Bank starts arbitration process against Maldives govt

Jul 25, http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/business/axis-bank-starts-arbitration-process-against-maldives-govt_924377.html

The names of the arbitrator are likely to be finalised by September. The final hearing, however, will take place in December. Axis Bank had lent around USD 160 million to GMR for Male airport development.

Maldives: Axis Bank's arbitration with Maldives unlikely to start this year

Jul 25, http://www.haveeru.com.mv/news/50232

Maldives government remained skeptical that the hearings on the Axis Bank-initiated arbitration for recovering the loans granted to India's GMR to develop the Male airport would commence by this December.

Malta to sign double taxation agreement with Azerbaijan

Aug 01, http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20130801/business-news/Malta-to-sign-double-taxation-agreement-with-Azerbaijan.480383

Malta and Azerbaijan will soon sign a double taxation agreement, which Ambassador Vaqif Sadiqof hopes will lead to far more trade between the two countries. There is certainly room for improvement from our side. Last year Malta exported just $400,000 worth - $155,000 of it being aircraft parts - but imported $51 million worth.

Mexico Says It Won't Appeal Arbitration Award for Spain's Abengoa

Aug 02, http://www.laht.com/article.asp?ArticleId=908526&CategoryId=14091

MEXICO CITY - Mexico confirmed Thursday it would not appeal an International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes decision requiring it to pay Spanish conglomerate Abengoa around 490 million pesos ($38 million).

Mongolia to simplify FDI for state-backed firms

Aug 06, http://www.scmp.com/business/commodities/article/1294552/mongolia-simplify-fdi-state-backed-firms

The Mongolian government expects to pass a new foreign direct investment law this year to streamline the approval of investments by foreign state-backed firms, according to a senior official.

Myanmar to redraw 1914 Company Act

Jul 25, http://www.elevenmyanmar.com/politics/2864-myanmar-to-redraw-1914-company-act

Myanmar’s Company Act 1914 will be redrawn with assistance from the Asia Development Bank (ADB), said the deputy minister for National Planning and Economic Development.

Naftogaz signs agreement with White&Case to present interest in Swedish court

Aug 02, http://en.interfax.com.ua/news/economic/162771.html

National joint-stock company Naftogaz Ukrainy on July 23, 2013 signed an agreement with White & Case LLP (New York, the United States) to represent Ukraine's interests at Svea Court of Appeals in a claims case by Italia Ukraina Gas S.p.a. (IUGAS, Italy), reads a report on the state procurement Web site.

A tender with one bidder was held. The value of the offer of White & Case is $250,000 (value added tax not included).

New Zealand: Treaty arbitration kept under wraps

Jul 31, http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/18240894/treaty-arbitration-kept-under-wraps/

Specific details are being kept under wraps as the Crown moves towards holding arbitration with Ngai Tahu and Tainui over top ups to their Treaty settlements. Both iwi received around 50 million dollars each late last year after the relativity clauses in their settlements were triggered.

Nigeria: "Arbitration will enhance the appeal of FDI in Nigeria" - Experts

Jul 24, http://www.cp-africa.com/2013/07/24/arbitration-will-enhance-the-appeal-of-fdi-in-nigeria-experts/

Experts have restated the positive impact of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) on Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) by promoting business opportunities in Nigeria. This was indicated at the recent International Market Place Conference that held in London.

Nigeria: Appeal Court Halts NNPC’s Attempt to Stop Arbitration

Aug 06, http://www.thisdaylive.com/articles/appeal-court-halts-nnpc-s-attempt-to-stop-arbitration/155588/

The Lagos Division of the Court of Appeal in Lagos has held that the Federal High Court in Lagos was wrong to have granted an injunction to a party that wanted to prevent the continuation of arbitration proceedings when that party had entered into an agreement to resolve all disputes through arbitration.

OECD: Lessons from Investment Policy Reform in Korea

Jul 30, http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/finance-and-investment/lessons-from-investment-policy-reform-in-korea_5k4376zqcpf1-en

Download: http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/lessons-from-investment-policy-reform-in-korea_5k4376zqcpf1.pdf;jsessionid=6d0c6sqoy0w0.x-oecd-live-02?contentType=/ns/WorkingPaper&itemId=/content/workingpaper/5k4376zqcpf1-en&containerItemId=/content/workingpaperseries/18151957&accessItemIds=&mimeType=application/pdf

Françoise Nicolas, Stephen Thomsen, Mi-Hyun Bang - As more and more countries seek to liberalise their foreign investment regimes to attract global flows of foreign direct investment (FDI), an essential question for policy-makers is no longer just what to reform but also how to reform. How is a reformist government to sell the idea of reform to the general public and to counter any opposition to reform? How are those who lose from reform in the short term to be compensated? Does sequencing of reforms matter?

Korea offers a particularly interesting case study because its reforms beginning in the 1990s were both rapid and far-reaching. Based on the OECD FDI Regulatory Restrictiveness Index, Korea was the biggest reformer of its policies towards FDI between 1997 and 2010 among a sample of 40 developed and emerging countries. The objective of this study is to document the liberalisation of the FDI regime in Korea and to examine how and why it came about. What were the main obstacles and what were the main drivers? How did FDI liberalisation relate to other reforms (trade policy and regulatory reform, policies towards outward investment)? The paper does not ask what more Korea needs to do but rather what lessons can we draw from the Korean experience about how to achieve rapid and sustainable reforms?

The insights from Korean liberalisation are useful for other countries, particularly non-OECD members in Asia and elsewhere, which still have high levels of statutory restrictions as measured by the FDI Index. Many of these countries are eager to attract more investment and recognise that they will need to reform their investment regime but are unsure how best to proceed. Each country?s reform path is unique, and this study will not provide a roadmap for other countries to follow, but it will nevertheless serve as a useful model for reformers in other countries and provide evidence that successful reform is accompanied by rising inflows of direct investment.

Keywords: FDI Regulatory Restrictiveness Index, investment policy reform, South Korea, segyehwa, foreign direct investment

Pakistan: International Court of Arbitration: Government faces $500 million lawsuit

Aug 05, http://tribune.com.pk/story/585881/international-court-of-arbitration-government-faces-500-million-lawsuit/

However, official documents reveal the company has taken the bureau to the International Court of Arbitration, claiming that it has not received the amount it was supposed to. Therefore, M/s Broadsheet representatives are expeditiously pursuing an arbitration claim of $500 million against Pakistan, which NAB, and the incumbent government, will have to defend.

Pakistan: KCCI calls for institutional arbitration

Aug 06, http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-3-194517-KCCI-calls-for-institutional-arbitration

KARACHI: Karachi Chamber of Commerce & Industry’s President Muhammad Haroon Agar has said that the trust deficit between Pakistan and friendly countries can be bridged while introducing institutional arbitration mechanisms employing the trade bodies in Pakistan and other countries.

Pakistan: US to finance feasibility study of $14bn dam

Jul 25, http://www.pakistansnewsonline.com/us-to-finance-feasibility-study-of-14bn-dam-dawn-com/

ISLAMABAD: The United States has formally decided to finance the feasibility study of $14 billion Diamer-Bhasha Dam — Pakistan’s top priority project —and to plead Islamabad’s case for a $7.3 billion bailout package from the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

Paraguay: Gobierno afirma que acuerdo con Bivac mejora imagen país

Jul 20, http://www.ultimahora.com/gobierno-afirma-que-acuerdo-bivac-mejora-imagen-pais-n705670.html

El ministro de Hacienda, Manuel Ferreira, y el miembro del Directorio Roland Holst destacaron que el acuerdo para la cancelación de la deuda con la empresa francesa Bureau Veritas, Inspection, Valuation, Assessment and Control (Bivac), mejorará la imagen de Paraguay a nivel internacional.

Paraguay: Hacienda y SGS arriban a acuerdo sobre reclamo de pago

Aug 01, http://www.lanacion.com.py/articulo/135995-hacienda-y-sgs-arriban-a-acuerdo-sobre-reclamo-de-pago.html

El Ministerio de Hacienda, en el proceso de mediación dirigido por el experto James Tull (CM Partners), utilizando la modalidad de mediación del Harvard Negotiation Project, y Société Générale de Surveillance S.A (SGS) arribaron a un acuerdo sobre el reclamo de US$ 58.526.188,73.

Philippines, Vietnam keen to discuss sea feud with China

Aug 02, http://www.arabnews.com/news/459923

MANILA/BEIJING: The Philippines' top diplomat said he and his Vietnamese counterpart discussed Thursday how their governments can work together to deal with territorial disputes with China, including a possible sharing of information to better guard their territories from intrusions.

Philippines-Belgium trade pact likely to revive P18.7 B dredging project in Laguna Lake

Jul 27, http://bulatlat.com/main/2013/07/27/ph-belgium-trade-pact-likely-to-revive-p18-7-b-dredging-project-in-laguna-lake/

MANILA - Laguna Lake based groups led by the Pambansang Lakas ng Kilusang Mamamalakaya ng Pilipinas (Pamalakaya), the umbrella alliance Save Laguna Lake Movement (SLLM) and Anakpawis party list-Laguna Lake chapter said the newly signed trade accord between the Philippines and the Belgian government may lead to the revival of the P 18.7 billion ($ 434.8 million) Laguna Lake Dredging Project.

Repsol Seeks to Block Chevron Deal With YPF Through World Bank (ICSID)

Jul 25, http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-25/repsol-seeks-to-block-chevron-deal-with-ypf-through-world-bank.html

Repsol SA (REP) is asking a World Bank panel to help prevent Argentina’s YPF SA from developing assets seized from the Spanish oil producer after Chevron Corp. agreed to invest $1.24 billion in a shale venture in the country.

Saint Lucia's joins ALBA; finalizes Bilateral Cooperation Agreement with Venezuela to purchase petroleum products

Jul 31, http://www.stlucia.gov.lc/press-release/historic-week-government

On Tuesday, the Government, led by the Ministry of Sustainable Development, Energy, Science and Technology, started two days of meetings with a high-level technical team from Venezuela and PDV S.A. to refine and finalize the Bilateral Cooperation Agreement that will allow Saint Lucia to purchase petroleum products from Venezuela at highly concessionary terms and establish a financing facility for essential major projects in the social and productive sectors. PetroCaribe provides Saint Lucia with an alternative source of petroleum that will advance the immediate and medium-term energy security agenda of the government.

Also on Tuesday, Prime Minister Hon. Kenny D. Anthony, accompanied by the Minister for Public Service, Sustainable Development, Energy, Science and Technology Sen. Hon. James Fletcher, participated in the XII Presidential Summit of ALBA in Guayaquil, Ecuador, at which Saint Lucia was officially accepted into the regional integration movement. In addition to providing an important regional forum for articulating the myriad pressing economic, social and environmental issues confronting developing States like ours, ALBA represents a significant avenue for Saint Lucia to access very low-cost financing for critical national initiatives.

Saint Lucia joins sister OECS member countries of Antigua and Barbuda, Dominica and St. Vincent and the Grenadines in ALBA.

Scotland: Short form arbitration to settle land disputes on tenant farms Market round-up

Jul 25, http://www.heraldscotland.com/business/farming/short-form-arbitration-to-settle-land-disputes-on-tenant-farms-market-round-up.21696932

Tenant farmers and landowners in Scotland now have access to a short form arbitration process to deal with disputes over rents.

Singapore's Top Court Suspends Lawyer for Champerty

Jul 23, http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202611925480&Singapores_Top_Court_Suspends_Lawyer_for_Champerty&slreturn=20130624134044

Singapore’s highest court has suspended a lawyer from practice for six months for champerty, the first sentence for the offense in the city-state in 35 years.

Singapore: More associations choose mediation as first step in resolving disputes

Jul 30, http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/more-associations-choose/759704.html

SINGAPORE: Four more associations will now have mediation as a first step in resolving disputes with consumers, after they signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Consumers Association of Singapore (CASE) on Monday.

South Korea: Minister urges leading role in FTA talks with China, Japan

Jul 25, http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/business/2013/07/25/0502000000AEN20130725002600320.html

Yonhap -- South Korea's finance minister on Thursday called on the government to show leadership in negotiations with Japan and China for a three-way free trade agreement, noting the outcome of the negotiations may well determine the country's status in Northeast Asia.

Spain: Fondos alemanes estudian otro arbitraje contra España por los recortes a la solar

Jul 30, http://vozpopuli.com/empresas/28956-fondos-alemanes-estudian-otro-arbitraje-contra-espana-por-los-recortes-a-la-solar

El despacho de abogados Rödl & Partner, que actualmente se ocupa de la defensa legal de los intereses de los propietarios de entre 150 y 200 megavatios (MW) fotovoltaicos, está sondeando entre sus clientes la apertura de un procedimiento arbitral contra el Gobierno español para solicitar una indemnización millonaria que compense los recortes a esta tecnología, que ya ha visto reducidos sus ingresos un 35%, sin contar con el efecto que tendrá la reforma energética aprobada este mes de julio por el Gobierno de Mariano Rajoy.

Spain: Los preferentistas de Bankia admitidos en el arbitraje tras iniciar un proceso judicial no pagarán costas

Jul 29, http://www.europapress.es/economia/finanzas-00340/noticia-economia-preferentistas-bankia-admitidos-arbitraje-iniciar-proceso-judicial-no-pagaran-costas-20130729142040.html

Los clientes de Bankia que adquirieron participaciones preferentes y que iniciaron un procedimiento judicial no tendrán que pagar las costas procesales del mismo en el caso de que desistan de esta opción si han sido aceptados en el procedimiento de arbitraje.

Spain: Red Eléctrica de España estimates the impact of the Government's reform at around 100 million euros

Jul 24, http://www.ree.es/ingles/sala_prensa/web/notas_detalle.aspx?id_nota=321

Following the publication of Royal Decree-Law 9/2013, of 12 July, by which urgent measures have been adopted to ensure the financial stability of the electricity system, the method of remuneration for electricity transmission activity has been fixed specifically for the period between the coming into force of this Royal Decree-law until 31 December, 2013 and for the year 2014.

Based on initial estimates made by the Company, the remuneration corresponding to the 2013 of transmission activity, which was set at a bit over €1.62 billion in February this year, will be reduced by an amount of approximately 100 million euros. In 2014, the transmission tariff will be around €1.6 billion.

The new remuneration shall be definitive for both fiscal years, notwithstanding that, in turn, the amounts relating to the availability incentive, investment remuneration, and operation and maintenance associated with unique investment shall be assessed and approved.

Shortly, the Ministry of Industry, Energy and Tourism will submit, for Government approval, a Royal Decree regulating the remuneration model of the transmission activity in the future.

For Red Eléctrica, the estimated adjustment of €100 million represents a significant negative impact and is in addition to the various cuts made since April 2012, estimated at over €440 million. Fundamentally, these cuts have been materialising in the one-year delay of revenues incoming from the putting in service of assets, which had a effect on the balance sheets of REE of nearly €200 million in 2012 and around €100 million in 2013. Also, it should be taken into account a further reduction of €45 million in remuneration received in both the 2012 and 2013 results due to the change of model, based on net assets and an additional €50 million for other additional items.

As a result, the impact of all these adjustments, under the Government's energy reforms between 2012 and 2013, on REE has amounted to nearly 18% of the remuneration of the Company.

Notwithstanding the aforementioned, the Company positively values the definitive elimination of the tariff deficit which will result in lower regulatory risk and a proper assessment of our business in the medium and long term.

Finally, Red Eléctrica expresses their confidence in their solid operational and economic base, which, as markets have recognised, will enable to mitigate the effects of these cuts and face the remaining future challenges regarding efficiency, flexibility, financial soundness and the anticipation capacity.

Sri Lanka: New appointments at the Institute for the Development of Commercial Law & Practice ("ICLP") Arbitration Center

Jul 25, http://www.dailynews.lk/?q=business/new-appointments-iclp-arbitration-center

Shehara Varia, Attorney at Law was recently appointed as the Secretary-General of the ICLP Arbitration Centre to fill the vacancy created by the demise of S.S. Wijeratne, Attorney at Law who held the post since October 1998.

Swaziland: SPTC lost E75m after wireless closure

Jul 24, http://www.times.co.sz/news/89679-sptc-lost-e75m-after-wireless-closure.html

MBABANE - The ruling of the International Court of Arbitration (ICA) cost the Swaziland Posts and Telecommunications Corporation (SPTC) E75 million.

Tanzania Raises Stakes in Border Spat with Malawi

Jul 26, http://www.voanews.com/content/reu-tanzania-raises-stakes-in-border-spat-with-malawi/1710325.html

NAIROBI — Tanzania said on Thursday its armed forces were ready to protect the country against any foreign threat to its territory, raising the stakes in an escalating border dispute with Malawi.

UK top judge backed Malawi in lake dispute with Tanzania

Jul 23, http://www.maravipost.com/malawi-bloggers/blogger-list/81-mabvuto-banda/4158-uk-top-judge-backed-malawi-in-lake-dispute-with-tanzania.html

The highly respected British judge Professor Rosalyn Higgins, QC, authored the opinion in 1988 as a consultant for Mobil Oil Corp which wanted to explore for oil and gas on the lake through Tanzania.

The firm wanted the Professor—hired before she was appointed to the ICJ—to establish the validity of Tanzania’s territorial claims to the lake.

The legal position, kept under wraps for 25 years, is a potential game changer in the 50-year-old dispute.

The crux of the opinion reads: “While the boundary between Malawi and Tanzania is Lake Nyasa [Malawi and] is a complicated issue, and not without its difficulties, I feel that the legal claims of Malawi to all of Lake Nyasa, and the submerged lands there under, is considerably the better claim,” said Judge Higgins.

United States Wins Trade Enforcement Case for American Farmers, Proves Export-Blocking Chinese Duties Unjustified Under WTO Rules

Aug 05, http://www.ustr.gov/US-Wins-Trade-Enforcement-Case-AmericanFarmers-Proves-Export-Blocking-Chinese-Duties-Unjustified-Under-WTO-Rule

Washington, D.C. – United States Trade Representative Michael Froman, Secretary of Commerce Penny Pritzker, and Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack announced today that the United States won a major case at the World Trade Organization (WTO) on behalf of American chicken producers, proving that China’s imposition of higher duties on chicken “broiler products” – which was followed by an 80-percent drop in American exports of those products to China – is unjustified under international trade rules. A WTO dispute settlement panel agreed with the United States, finding that China violated numerous WTO obligations in conducting its investigations and imposing anti-dumping (AD) duties and countervailing duties (CVD) on chicken imports from the United States.

The Monitoring and Enforcement unit of the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative and other USTR staff worked closely with the U.S. Department of Commerce and the U.S. Department of Agriculture in preparing and litigating this case. Personnel from the Interagency Trade Enforcement Center (ITEC), created by President Obama to enhance U.S. trade enforcement capabilities, also provided support for the dispute.

US engineering firm wins default judgment against Dagestani glass company

Jul 22, http://rapsinews.com/judicial_news/20130722/268277989.html

RAPSI - A US federal court has granted a motion filed by US-based glass engineering firm Henry F. Teichmann, Inc. (Teichmann) seeking default judgment against Dagestani glass company Caspian Flat Glass OJSC (Caspian) based on the failure of the latter to timely respond to a complaint and summons served amidst effort to compel arbitration in Zurich, according to documents obtained by RAPSI.

US-Venezuela: Helmerich & Payne still battling Venezuela for compensation on seized assets

Aug 03, http://www.tulsaworld.com/article.aspx/Helmerich_Payne_still_battling_Venezuela_for_compensation/20130803_46_E1_Tulsab549555

Tulsa-based contract driller Helmerich & Payne settled a dispute related to its seized former Venezuela rigs for $15 million in July, but the case against the South American country is still being battled in federal court.

US: Arbitration nightmare

Jul 31, http://www.timesunion.com/business/article/Arbitration-nightmare-4691218.php

Investor Sergio Alvarado of Round Lake, Ill., was awarded $748,000 in damages and interest in October after a dispute with his brokerage went through arbitration. Alvarado, however, still hasn't collected a dime.

US: Citigroup Ordered to Pay $10.8 Million in Arbitration

Jul 31, http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-31/citigroup-ordered-to-pay-10-8-million-in-arbitration.html

Citigroup Inc. (C), the third-largest U.S. bank, was ordered to pay $10.8 million to a customer over his losses on investments in Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc.

US: Federal judge says Donziger not entitled to damages in Chevron RICO case

Jul 31, http://legalnewsline.com/issues/class-action/243193-federal-judge-says-donziger-not-entitled-to-damages-in-chevron-rico-case

Legal Newsline — A federal judge ruled Monday that New York attorney Steven Donziger, who is being sued by Chevron Corp. for fraud, is not entitled to damages over alleged misrepresentations.

US: Gainesville Regional Utilities: City loses arbitration fight against biomass plant owners

Aug 01, http://www.gainesville.com/article/20130801/articles/130809958

The city of Gainesville has lost its legal battle against the biomass plant owner.

On Thursday, an arbitrator granted the Gainesville Renewable Energy Center's motion to dismiss the city's arbitration claim.

From December through May, Gainesville paid the New York City offices of the international law firm Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe approximately $853,000 in legal fees for "matters related to the biomass plant" including the arbitration and a related mediation process intended to resolve the dispute. Hourly rates for attorneys with that firm ranged up to $995.

The City Commission filed for arbitration in December on the premise that the late 2011 sale of a 40 percent stake in the plant, combined with the prior sale of a 17 percent stake, constituted a change of controlling interest that should have triggered the city's contractual right of first offer to buy the plant.

US: House Democrat introduces bill to end mandatory arbitration

Aug 05, http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20130805/FREE/130809965

Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn., a member of the House Financial Services Committee, has introduced legislation that would end mandatory arbitration in broker and investment adviser agreements with clients, but the bill faces an uphill battle. The measure, floated Aug. 2, also would prohibit any restriction on class action claims.

US: Judge tosses out Goldman ruling, points to arbitrator

Aug 01, http://5nat.com/2013/08/01/25073.html

Reuters - A federal judge late on Thursday tossed out a securities arbitration ruling against an investor who sought to recoup $1.4 million from Goldman Sachs Group Inc (GS.N), citing an arbitrator's failure to fully disclose his involvement in an unrelated criminal proceeding, according to a court opinion.

Judge J. Curtis Joyner of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania threw out the arbitration award after ruling that the investor's legal rights in the proceeding were compromised by an arbitrator who misled the parties about his indictment for the unauthorized practice of law and by not participating in the decision, according to the opinion.

US: RICO and Alien Tort Lawsuit against China's Largest Oil Company for Human Rights Abuses on Behalf of Chinese Businessman

Jul 25, http://www.marketwatch.com/story/arent-fox-files-rico-and-alien-tort-lawsuit-against-chinas-largest-oil-company-for-human-rights-abuses-on-behalf-of-chinese-businessman-2013-07-25

LOS ANGELES, Jul 25, 2013 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- On July 24, Arent Fox LLP filed RICO and Alien Tort Claims Act charges in a California federal court against China Petroleum & Chemical Corporation Ltd. (SINOPEC), one of the world's largest oil and natural gas companies, and a subsidiary of the Chinese government. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of Tiangang Sun, a self-made Chinese billionaire who suffered human rights violations, including malicious prosecution, false arrest, detention and torture at the hands of the Chinese government. Case No. CV13-05355.

Mr. Sun, now a California resident, filed his case in the United States District Court for the Central District of California, as he was unable to get a fair trial in China where, according to the United States State Department 2012 Country Report, "closed trials" are the norm and the government maintains "political control of courts and judges," where "Judges regularly received political guidance on pending cases, including instructions on how to rule...particularly in politically sensitive cases."

"Our judicial system offers him the opportunity for a fair and open hearing not available to him in China or elsewhere," said Michael Zweiback, a white collar partner at Arent Fox and lead trial counsel for Mr. Sun.

According to the filing, when Mr. Sun demanded financial redress for the economic harm caused by SINOPEC's illegal actions, officials at the company threatened him, while demanding that he cease all efforts to hold SINOPEC responsible for its conduct or risk his personal safety. After repeatedly trying to resolve the dispute amicably, Mr. Sun was told that if he continued to demand accountability, SINOPEC would arrange to have him imprisoned. Mr. Sun responded to these threats by filing two lawsuits, one in Hong Kong and the other in Beijing, ultimately resulting in his detention in inhumane conditions for over five years.

The lawsuit states that after serving more than five years in a Chinese prison and 16 months under house arrest, Mr. Sun was told that he would be detained again with family members if he brought any legal action against SINOPEC and those who interrogated him. In November 2012 he fled the country for the United States to seek protection and to make public SINOPEC's actions, including the false and misleading financial statements it has made to the public about its oil operations. Even while in the US Mr. Sun continued to receive threats of serious bodily harm and even death to his wife, daughter and other family members if he pursued legal action in the US. Those threats are still ongoing, forcing him to hire a private security firm to safeguard his life.

"Stripped of his fortune, his family, his country, his peace of mind and even his health by the defendants who continue to threaten his life and those of his wife and daughter in China, Mr. Sun is determined to fight for his rights," said Mr. Zweiback. "He is committed to bring into the light of day the illegal tactics SINOPEC utilizes to functionally and physically eliminate its competitors, to steal their assets and have their principals thrown in jail under false pretenses."

Strategic, aggressive, and innovative, Arent Fox's Complex Litigation group has been recognized by Chambers USA for its "streamlined" approach that delivers "quality" results. With more than 125 litigators, the practice boasts a deep bench and international reach while having extensive experience in bet-the-company cases before federal and state courts and regulatory agencies. The group is especially proficient at managing parallel litigation in multiple jurisdictions and represents clients in matters that include intellectual property, health care, life sciences, trade, automotive, insurance and human rights abuses.

US: Sending Message to Iran, House Approves Tougher Sanctions

Aug 01, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/01/us/politics/sending-message-to-iran-house-approves-tougher-sanctions.html?_r=0

The House overwhelmingly approved legislation on Wednesday that would impose the toughest sanctions yet on Iran, calling the measure a critical step to cripple the country's disputed nuclear program and brushing aside calls for restraint by critics who said the Iranian president-elect should first be given a chance to negotiate.

US: Statement on the 18th Round of Trans-Pacific Partnership Negotiations - TPP Negotiators Press Ahead in Malaysia, Welcome Japan’s Entry

Jul 29, http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/press-releases/2013/july/statement-18th-round-tpp

Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia – Officials reported today that they achieved further strong progress at the 18th round of Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) negotiations, which ended today, keeping their eyes fixed on the goal set by President Obama and the other TPP Leaders of concluding a high-standard, comprehensive agreement this year, while welcoming Japan’s entry into the negotiations. Through the TPP, the United States is seeking to advance a 21st-century trade and investment framework that will boost competitiveness, expand trade and investment with the robust economies of the Asia Pacific, and support the creation and retention of U.S. jobs, while promoting core U.S. principles on labor rights, environmental protection, and transparency.

Following the guidance of the trade ministers from the United States and the other TPP countries prior to this round – Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam – the negotiating groups covering market access, rules of origin, technical barriers to trade, investment, financial services, e-commerce, and transparency reached agreement on a wide range of technical issues in the legal texts of these chapters, which set the rules that govern the conduct of their trade and investment relations. They also found common ground on issues that allowed them to make progress in the negotiating groups covering intellectual property, competition, and environment. In addition, each group developed a detailed plan for closing remaining issues and completing their work.

The negotiators also moved ahead in their efforts to construct the ambitious packages that will provide access to their respective markets for industrial, agricultural and textile and apparel products, services and investment, and government procurement. They agreed on next steps and an overall plan for achieving these market access outcomes in the timeframe agreed by Leaders.

Throughout the talks, negotiators reflected the wide range of views provided to them by their stakeholders on the best pathway to promote trade and investment, regional integration, and jobs in the United States and the other TPP countries. The TPP negotiations were temporarily adjourned on July 20 so the delegates could listen to and share information with more than 200 stakeholders from the United States and across the TPP region. Stakeholders also met informally with U.S. and other negotiators to provide further detailed information. U.S. chief negotiator Barbara Weisel and her fellow TPP chief negotiators also briefed stakeholders on the status of the negotiations and responded to their questions on specific issues and the process going forward.

On July 23, the United States and the other TPP countries welcomed Japan as the 12th member of the negotiations, following the successful completion of the respective domestic procedures of the United States and the other existing TPP members. Japan received detailed updates on the status of the negotiations and participated actively in the work of the negotiating groups that were meeting on those dates, expressing its commitment to integrate quickly and smoothly into the process. With Japan’s entry, TPP countries now account for nearly 40 percent of global GDP and about one-third of all world trade.

Ministers from the TPP countries have been in close touch on TPP over the past month. Over the past week, USTR Froman met in Washington with Vietnamese Trade Minister Hoang, Bruneian Trade Minister Pehin Lim, and Japanese Minister for the Economy, Trade and Industry Motegi, and spoke by phone with Director General Jana of Chile’s trade ministry (DIRECON) and Mexican Economy Minister Guajardo. Additionally, Ambassador Froman met with Vietnamese President Truong Tan Sang during President Sang’s visit to Washington, D.C. this week.

Ambassador Froman and the other TPP ministers plan to engage regularly in the coming weeks ahead of the next round to find solutions to the sensitive issues that remain, guide the work of negotiators, and keep the negotiations moving expeditiously toward a high-standard outcome the TPP Leaders agreed to seek.

The 19th round of TPP negotiations will be held in Brunei from August 22-30.

US: Tesla Motors Sues Atlas Technologies

Jul 17, http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-17/tesla-sues-machinery-maker-atlas-technologies-over-agreement.html

Tesla Motors Inc. (TSLA), the electric-car maker run by billionaire Elon Musk, sued machinery maker Atlas Technologies Inc. over whether a dispute about an agreement must be heard by an arbitrator.

US: United States and Vietnam Agree to Intensify TPP Engagement, Aim to Reach Comprehensive Agreement This Year

Jul 29, http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/press-releases/2013/july/us-vietnam-intensify-engagement-tpp

Washington, D.C. – Ambassador Michael Froman met today with Vietnam’s President Truong Tan Sang and Minister of Industry and Trade Vu Huy Hoang to discuss the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) negotiations. They reaffirmed the objective of concluding the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) this year as a shared priority for both countries. All welcomed the significant progress being made during the round of TPP negotiations in Malaysia this week, and agreed to direct their negotiators to intensify engagement on a range of market access and rules issues with a view to resolving outstanding matters as quickly as possible.

“Vietnam has come a long way in addressing its own challenges to meet the high standards of the TPP, but we still have work to do together,” said Ambassador Froman. “I expect that the discussion over the coming weeks leading up to the APEC Leaders’ Meeting in October will be crucial in this process, and the United States is committed to continuing its close engagement with Vietnam to reach an ambitious, high-standard agreement with all our TPP partners.”

The ministers agreed that successful completion of a comprehensive TPP would strengthen economic ties between the two countries, promoting economic growth and development and supporting creation and retention of jobs.

Vietnam backs arbitration of sea dispute with China

Aug 02, http://www.manilatimes.net/vietnam-backs-arbitration-of-sea-dispute-with-china/25459/

Vietnamese Foreign Minister Pham Binh Minh expressed support to the country's move to bring its dispute with China before an international court as he disclosed that his country has also rejected Beijing's proposal to jointly explore contested areas in the West Philippine Sea (South China Sea). Foreign Affairs Secretary Albert del Rosario said the Vietnamese official backed the arbitration case filed by the Philippines against China before the International Tribunal of the Law of the Sea (Itlos).

Washington to push Beijing for South China Sea code, Biden says

Jul 29, http://www.smh.com.au/world/washington-to-push-beijing-for-south-china-sea-code-biden-says-20130729-2qtrd.html

Singapore: Vice President Joe Biden said the US is pushing China to negotiate quickly with Southeast Asian nations on a code of conduct for the South China Sea, an area that's a "major, major, major highway of commerce."

Events

2024

April 2024

  • CIArb Virtual Diploma in International Maritime Arbitration (Booking deadline: 31 January 2024)
    With maritime arbitrations on the rise, build your knowledge now! The scale, diverse range and complexity of maritime arbitrations coupled with an increase in arbitral systems means that it is essential to have the right knowledge and skills to navigate this field. Ciarb’s highly popular Virtual Diploma in International Maritime Arbitration will provide you with this and more! Join international dispute resolution specialist George Lambrou FCIArb for this Diploma, delivered virtually from 3 April 2024 to 26 June 2024, on Wednesdays for two and a half hours.
    3 April 2024 - 26 June 2024. Online,
    More information is available at the organisers website

May 2024

  • Pakistan International Disputes Weekend (PIDW)
    South Asia's premiere legal conference for 'reviewing, reflecting and reviving' the landscape for dispute resolution. The conference is organized annually in Pakistan by international construction law firm MK Consultus. Bringing together international dispute resolution experts, government representatives, serving members of Pakistan's judiciary, Legal 500 firms, international ADR Centres and global masters of the trade in South Asia's emerging economic corridor, PIDW has revitalized the ADR sector in Pakistan, contributing significantly to the discourse regarding reform.
    11 May 2024 - 12 May 2024. Karachi, Pakistan,
    More information is available at the organisers website
  • 4th Edition Executive Course on International Arbitration - King's College London (Application deadline: 03 May 2024)
    [Application deadline: 03 May 2024] Join leading global arbitration experts for King’s College London’s Executive Course on International Arbitration, online, starting on 17 May 2024. Develop your skills and grow your network with this CPD accredited course. Learn the key elements of practice, from drafting effective arbitation agreements to enforcing arbitral awards around the globe.
    17 May 2024 - 21 June 2024. Online; Fridays (11:30 - 15:00 BST) over 6 weeks,
    More information is available at the organisers website
  • Dispute Resolution in M&A Transactions - 7th edition
    International Conference for Promoting Arbitration - The biggest M&A conference in the region, a truly unique event. Who should attend: * Arbitrators; * Attorneys; * In-house counsel; * M&A legal and business advisors. More information about the program and topics to be announced, in the meantime, visit the conference website to see the archives of the 6th (2022) and 5th (2019) editions of the conference.
    23 May 2024 - 24 May 2024. Warsaw, Poland,
    More information is available at the organisers website
  • International Arbitration Summer Institute - Center on International Commercial Arbitration (AU WCL)
    Taught by leading practitioners and arbitrators from around the world, the International Arbitration Summer Institute is an intense three-week certificate program that addresses foundational and practical aspects of international commercial arbitration. Networking activities such as special lectures, coffee hours, luncheons, and site visits to D.C. law firms and institutions provide participants with ample opportunities to network beyond the classroom setting. This Summer Institute is one of the annual events hosted by the Center on Int'l Commercial Arbitration. The Center is directed by Horacio A. Grigera Naón, a renowned independent international arbitrator and former secretary general of the Int'l Court of Arbitration of the Int'l Chamber of Commerce. The rest of the faculty of this Summer Institute is also very prominent. Participants may opt to stay in the American University dormitory at Cassell Hall.
    28 May 2024 - 13 June 2024. Washington, D.C.,
    More information is available at the organisers website

June 2024

  • Baltic Arbitration Days (13th edition)
    The Baltic Arbitration Days is an international forum for arbitration practitioners and academics, which takes place every June in Riga and Jurmala. During two days of lectures and social functions, we discuss current issues of international commercial and investment arbitration. While Central- and Eastern Europe remains the focus of the conference, different guest countries or regions are designated each year, hosting speakers and participants from around the world. Topics: * Investigations & Enforcement; * Investment Arbitration Update; * Climate & Energy & Construction Arbitration; * Legaltech & IT in Arbitration.
    2 June 2024 - 3 June 2024. Riga and Jurmala,
    More information is available at the organisers website
  • CanArbWeek 2024
    TOPICS: * ADRIC - Awards: Law and Practice; * SIAC - Demystifying the Scrutiny Process; * CPR Canada - In-House Counsel Wishlist: Dispute Boards; * CIArb Canada - Debate Series: Vavilov, Value, Venue; * Ciarb Canada Award for Distinguished Service; * ICC Canada - Navigating the Grey: Conflicts of Interest; * VanIAC - Ask us Anything: from Appointment to PO1; * WCCAS - Arbitrating Your Way to a Speedier Trial; * ICDR Canada - Debate on Proposed Rules Changes; * YCAP - Costs Report: DOs and DON’Ts in Cost Awards; * TCAS - Exploring the Psychology of Arbitration; * and more... Gala Welcome Reception (2 June 2024); Early Bird Tickets Until 1 May 2024.
    3 June 2024 - 4 June 2024. Toronto, Canada,
    More information is available at the organisers website
  • Critical Developments in International Arbitration - 5th edition of the Bucharest Arbitration Days
    The theme of the BArD 2024 brings to our attention the recurrent concern with the legitimacy of international arbitration, as a suitable dispute resolution mechanism for commercial disputes. The 2021 Queen Mary University of London and White & Case Survey has highlighted the evolving nature of international arbitration, adapting to the challenges posed, among others by diversity, technology, environmental considerations and information security. BArD 2024 will discuss ethics and conflicts in int'l arbitration; the evolving relationship between arbitration and courts; the diversity in arbitration from the perspective of diversity of seats and arbitration institutions; the ongoing discussion on evidence and the impact of technology on it. With a focus on disputes involving foreign investments, BArD 2024 will tackle the critical issue of the regulatory space of States, in particular in the context of the transition to a clean energy and int'l commitments on climate change.
    6 June 2024 - 7 June 2024. Bucharest, Romania; Virtual,
    More information is available at the organisers website
  • I Investment Forum
    This event aims to bring together key stakeholders (government officials, business leaders, legal professionals, and foreign investors) on a single platform to highlight significant legal aspects influencing business and investments in Ukraine. It includes an in-depth analysis of Ukraine's investment climate, dispelling common myths about conducting business in our country, preparing Ukrainian businesses for European Union integration, and focusing on recent legal improvements in sectors such as agriculture, extractive industries, energy, and defense. Identifying existing legal issues and presenting practical solutions is also a key focus.
    6 June 2024 - 7 June 2024. Kyiv, Ukraine; Online (Zoom),
    More information is available at the organisers website
  • Arbitration and State: A Complex Symbiosis - XVIII International Congres CEIA
    Topics: * Presentation of the Report on the Inclusion of Disability in Arbitration (CEIA - CINDA); * The work of UNCITRAL Group III; * State and anti-process measures in arbitration; * State responsability for the denial of recognition and execution of arbitration agreements and awards; * The State as a police against corruption in arbitration; * LATAM 360°: Administrative activity as the object of the arbitration disputes; * Arbitration as a mechanism for resolving conflicts between States; * The cases of the year: procedural situations when the State is a party. The conference will have Spanish-English simultaneous translation.
    9 June 2024 - 11 June 2024. Madrid, Spain,
    More information is available at the organisers website
  • Italian Arbitration Day: The Geography of International Arbitration
    The Italian Association for Arbitration and the Milan Chamber of Arbitration, with the support of several national and international organizations, join forces to organize the third Italian Arbitration Day ("IAD"). The IAD will explore the geography of arbitration, navigating the routes of international arbitration, exploring methods and characters of its actors. Stellar international practitioners will discuss the ever-changing map of international arbitration. Participants will be able to contribute ideas, experiences and anecdotes. PROGRAM: * KEYNOTE SPEECH: Lucio Caracciolo - Arbitration and Geopolitics: A Way to De-escalate International Crises? * Panel I - Quo Vadis International Arbitration? Of Parties, Arbitrators and Arbitral Institutions + Reverse Debate * A View from Our Partners: Unidroit * Panel II - International Conflicts and Economic Sanctions: What Role for International Arbitration? + Reverse Debate
    13 June 2024. Rome, Italy,
    More information is available at the organisers website
  • Arbitration Academy 2024
    Applications for the 2024 session of the International Academy for Arbitration Law will be opened soon. The Arbitration Academy is designed to provide advanced courses in arbitration law to students, government officials and practitioners who have already a general knowledge of arbitration law. The Academy provides advanced Summer Courses in Paris to students and young practitioners interested in international arbitration. The Curriculum is conceived by international arbitration academics and practitioners to cover all aspects of international arbitration, and the Courses are taught by the most renowned experts in the fields of international commercial arbitration and investment treaty arbitration. A great opportunity to attend high-level courses and seminars on International Arbitration, and to learn from world-renowned professors and practitioners - don't miss out!
    17 June 2024 - 4 July 2024. Paris, France,
    More information is available at the organisers website or contact
  • El arbitraje internacional en materia de construcción (AU WCL)
    El arbitraje comercial internacional constituye el mecanismo preferido para la solución de disputas en el mundo de los negocios. Un área en que el arbitraje internacional tiene frecuente aplicación es en disputas que emergen de proyectos de construcción. En América Latina el arbitraje de construcción también ha comenzado a ser muy relevante. Esta evolución ha generado una extensa demanda de profesionales altamente formados y especializados en esta materia. Por esto el Centro de Arbitraje Comercial Internacional de la AUWCL trabaja junto con la Comisión Interamericana de Arbitraje Comercial (CIAC) para ofrecer este Seminario Práctico en arbitraje de construcción en junio y julio de 2024. Este Seminario Práctico permite experimentar el desarrollo de un proceso arbitral en materia de construcción desde los inicios de la disputa y su tratamiento por la junta de resolución de disputas, pasando por la notificación de arbitraje, la práctica de la prueba, hasta la adopción del laudo. ...
    17 June 2024 - 12 July 2024. Washington, D.C.,
    More information is available at the organisers website
  • London Summer Arbitration School (Application deadline 20 April 2024)
    The London Summer Arbitration School will feature an interactive five-day programme introducing participants not only to commercial arbitration, but also to less well-known types of arbitration such as maritime, construction and commodities arbitration. The participants will also engage in discussion of related career and business development opportunities with practitioners and representatives of institutions. Topics: * ad hoc arbitration; * maritime arbitration; * construction arbitration; * commodities arbitration; * commercial arbitration; * ethics in international arbitration; * banking & finance arbitration; * climate change arbitration; * outer space arbitration; * investor-state arbitration; * relationship between arbitral tribunals and domestic courts. It will also be possible to attend the school in the online format. Registration deadline: 20 April 2024.
    17 June 2024 - 21 June 2024. Online; London, United Kingdom,
    More information is available at the organisers website

July 2024

  • Brunel Law School Summer Program on International Arbitration
    This Programme will cover "International Commercial Arbitration" (ICA) and "Investment Treaty Arbitration" (ITA) and will include esteemed arbitration scholars and practitioners such as Professor Kaj Hobér, Dr Kabir Duggal, Sir Bernard Rix, Dr Ylli Dautaj and others. ICA is essentially a private resolution forum between private parties (or States acting in a private capacity, jure gestionis), where the subject-matter of the dispute often stems from a "commercial" contract or undertaking of some sort. When studying ICA, we will largely focus on the process of arbitration and not on the subject matter. ITA, on the other hand, is a form of arbitration between foreign investors and host States regarding foreign direct investment (FDI). The subject-matter is arbitrated under public international law, more specifically international investment law. 10% early bird discount if booked by 30th April 2024.
    8 July 2024 - 13 July 2024. London, UK,
    More information is available at the organisers website
  • Brunel Law School Summer Program on International Arbitration
    This Programme will cover "Int'l Commercial Arbitration" (ICA) and "Investment Treaty Arbitration" (ITA) and will include esteemed arbitration scholars and practitioners such as Professor Kaj Hobér, Dr Kabir Duggal, Sir Bernard Rix, Dr Ylli Dautaj and others.ICA is essentially a private resolution forum between private parties (or States acting in a private capacity, jure gestionis), where the subject-matter of the dispute often stems from a "commercial" contract or undertaking of some sort. When studying ICA, we will largely focus on the process of arbitration and not on the subject matter. ITA, on the other hand, is a form of arbitration between foreign investors and host States regarding foreign direct investment (FDI). The subject-matter is arbitrated under public int'l law, more specifically international investment law. Int'l investment law is a sub-specie of int'l economic law. Upon conclusion of the Summer Programme, all participants shall receive a Certificate of Attendance.
    8 July 2024 - 13 July 2024. London, UK,
    More information is available at the organisers website

October 2024

  • International Law Weekend 2024 - Powerless law or law for the powerless? (Call for Panel Proposals deadline 15 April 2024)
    International law faces an existential threat as history unfolds at unprecedented speed worldwide. Indeed, international law and international institutions at times appear incapable of protecting vulnerable persons against war, disease, hunger, exploitation, climate change, and other human and natural catastrophes. Some people-both individually and collectively-are openly eschewing legal values and frameworks in order to pursue results through other means, including dangerous and destabilizing ones. Is international law, in fact, powerless or does it remain a source of power that vulnerable persons can utilize to protect and advance their rights and interests? This year's ILW is focused on engaged, interactive, and inclusive discussions about how international law can transcend perceptions and misperceptions of its powerlessness and fulfill its aspirations of balancing power through principles of justice, equality, and dignity. Call for Panel Proposals deadline 15 April 2024.
    24 October 2024 - 26 October 2024. New York City, USA,
    More information is available at the organisers website

Note: a list of prior events can be found here.

CEPMLP conference: Oil, Gas and Minerals - International Arbitration and Advocacy Skills

Jul 25, http://www.dundee.ac.uk/cepmlp/gateway/index.php?news=32737

This 5-day conference on International Arbitration in the oil, gas and minerals industry is intended to be of interest to lawyers and non-lawyers alike and will run in London from 2nd - 6th September 2013

Arbitration of RAND Disputes Will Be the Focus of ANSI’s 2013 Legal Issues Forum on October 1st

Oct 1, http://www.ansi.org/news_publications/news_story.aspx?menuid=7&articleid=3674

Standards developing organizations (SDOs) typically require their members to license any patent that is essential to implementing the standard (referred to as a Standard-Essential Patent or SEP) on reasonable and non-discriminatory (RAND) terms. A number of high-stakes disputes have recently arisen about what these “RAND” commitments really mean and how they can be resolved more efficiently and without resort to litigation. Many have pointed to arbitration as a possible means of resolving them.

LMAA: London Maritime Arbitrators Association Mock Arbitration Event on September 9th

Sep 9, http://www.lmaa.org.uk/event.aspx?pkNewsEventID=2f6fa33a-f2e2-47c3-98cb-153f37cec19a

On 9th September, as part of London International Shipping Week, The London Maritime Arbitrators Association jointly with the London Shipping Law Centre will present a charterparty dispute arbitration scenario which will involve role-playing in a prepared arbitration scenario dealing with a realistic shipping dispute and show the workings of an oral hearing in a LMAA arbitration.

It may be of particular interest to those who may be involved in London maritime arbitration in future but who may not have experienced what takes place at rather than in an oral hearing.

The participants will be leading arbitration practitioners and there will be an explanation of the proceedings and Q and A discussion session.

Singapore International Arbitration Forum 2013

Dec 02, http://www.pca-cpa.org/shownews.asp?ac=view&nws_id=375&pag_id=1261

The Permanent Court of Arbitration is a supporting organization of the Singapore International Arbitration Forum 2013, to be held on December 2, 2013 at Gardens by the Bay, Singapore. The theme of SIAF 2013 is “Adventures with Blank Sheets of Paper”, comprised of a day of “blue sky” experimental thinking on the structure and practice of international arbitration.

Confirmed speakers include: Tim Eicke QC, Professor Maryanne Garry, Edwin Glasgow CBE QC, H.E. Judge Sir Christopher Greenwood CMG QC, Lord Hoffmann, Professor Dr Rolf Knieper, Toby Landau QC, Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon, Karyl Nairn QC, Justice V K Rajah, Lucy Reed, Michael E.Schneider, The Honourable James Spigelman AC QC, and Christopher Thomas QC.

For more information please visit the SIAF website at http://www.siaf.sg

Jobs / Moves

ICC: Christian Albanesi becomes Court Managing Counsel - International Court of Arbitration

Jul 29, http://www.iccwbo.org/News/Articles/2013/Christian-Albanesi-becomes-Court-Managing-Counsel/

The International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce has announced the promotion of Christian Albanesi to the position of Managing Counsel following the departure of Victoria Orlowski earlier this month.

Prof. Susan Franck Joins Review Team and Editorial Board for Academic Publications

Jul 29, http://wlulawfaculty.wordpress.com/2013/07/29/prof-susan-franck-joins-review-team-and-editorial-board-for-academic-publications/

Second, Prof. Franck will join the Editorial Board of a new series on International Investment Law from Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. According to an announcement from the publisher, "the Nijhoff International Investment Law Series groups important, high-quality and original research in the field of international investment law. Although formally a part of international law generally, international investment law has become an independent field of research, crossing the boundaries between public international law, international commercial law, and domestic public law. The Series therefore covers international investment law in a relatively broad sense, including research on the substantive aspects of international investment law and the dispute settlement aspects, i.e., international investment arbitration.

Three New Practitioners Extend Blackstone Chambers' International Reach

Jul 23, http://www.blackstonechambers.com/news/news/three_new.html

Harish Salve, Senior Advocate, is recognised as one of India’s most eminent senior advocates and joins Blackstone as a full member of Chambers. Two new associates join Chambers, Professor Harold Hongju Koh is a former US State Department Legal Adviser and currently Sterling Professor of International Law at Yale Law School, and Keith Azopardi QC is the former Deputy Chief Minister of Gibraltar (2000-2003) and now practises as a consultant with Triay Stagnetto Neish in Gibraltar, having taken silk in March 2012.

ICSID

... See @ogeltdm for further updates...