Friday, 13 September 2013

Some International Arbitration Notes and Research

Papers On International arbitrage

Major periodicals devoted to international commercial
arbitration
American Review of International Arbitration
Arbitration International
Arbitration, Journal of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators
ASA Bulletin (Swiss Arbitration Association Bulletin)
Croatian Arbitration Yearbook
Dispute Resolution Journal
International Arbitration Law Review
International Chamber of Commerce, International Court of Arbitration
Bulletin
Journal of International Arbitration
Journal of International Dispute Resolution
Mealey’s International Arbitration Reports
Revue de l’arbitrage
Rivista dell’ Arbitrato
Recht und Praxis der Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit
World Arbitration and Mediation Report
World Trade and Arbitration Materials
Yearbook of Commercial Arbitration
• Zeitschrift für Schiedsverfahren By Gold or Silver 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ICSID How long does it take ?

ICSID arbitration: how long does it take?
Thanks to fresh research the answer is known. Anthony Sinclair, of Allen & 
Overy’s international arbitration group, with the help of colleagues Louise 
Fisher and Sarah Macrory, analysed the timetables of the ICSID cases that, to 
date, have produced an award. Their findings are summarised below

when lawyers in private practice or in-house counsel prepare estimates or budgets for legal expenditure, they are all 
too aware that time means money. Yet when a potential claimant or respondent, facing an ICSID arbitration, asks 
“how long will it take?”, do we really know? The reader will find some of the answers in the report below, which 
summarises the key findings of a survey we undertook of the 115 ICSID cases that have led to an award (including 
awards embodying settlement agreements), from the creation of the ICSID Centre through to 1 July 2009.
Most lawyers can think of horror stories of litigation gone off the rails or drawn-out wars of attrition. Presumably this 
happens in ICSID arbitrations too, and these unusually long cases therefore affect some of the results reported below. Outliers may 
never be eliminated since proceedings can derail and suffer excessive delay for all manner of reasons, whether particular to the 
circumstances of the case, the parties or the tribunal. If Tolstoy had been an international arbitration lawyer, he might have said 
“efficient proceedings are all alike; every inefficient proceeding is inefficient in its own way”. So little is likely to be learned by 
dissecting the longer proceedings and seeking to identify a malignancy at their core, which may not even be there. “Efficiency” is 
also a somewhat subjective concept: what is most efficient for the claimant may be prejudicial to a respondent. For these reasons, 
we report only the data and our findings based upon it. We also focus primarily on average figures. No criticism is intended or 
implied of any individual matter since the course of individual cases is inevitably dictated by its own particular features.
The data upon which we rely is available for all to see on the ICSID website, in the ICSID Annual Reports, and in the 
helpful procedural summaries contained in most, if not all, ICSID awards. The data may contain errors or anomalies, in part 
perhaps because of the authors’ own frailties, but also because of patchy reporting of rather mundane procedural matters. Even 
so, it is still fair to analyse the body of ICSID cases as a whole, to consider the performance of the ICSID system on average, 
and to take stock.
“About three years and seven months”
How long does an ICSID arbitration take? The answer from our survey is that ICSID arbitrations to date have taken 1,325 days 
on average. That is 3.6 years, from the date the request for arbitration is filed 
to the date of a final award. This figure does not factor in “cooling off” 
periods before the formal commencement of proceedings, or the possibility 
of annulment proceedings following an award. 
Is 3.6 years “good” or “bad”? Who can say? It is not clear that there is 
an “ideal” duration for an ICSID arbitration, since they vary to such a great 
extent in their complexity, value, detail and sensitivity, not to mention the 
volume of documents involved or number of witnesses to be heard. This 
figure is also an average of different types of ICSID arbitrations. It includes 
both the long and complex cases – with discrete phases, determination of 
preliminary issues, and the need for numerous findings on disputed issues 
of fact and law – and the shorter cases such as those in which jurisdiction 
was denied. 
Focusing purely on the more recent past, ICSID arbitrations may, on the whole, be shortening in duration. For the 32 cases 
commenced in the past five years that have led to an award and for which data is available, the average time from the request for 
arbitration to the award is closer to 3 By Gold or Silver 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oxus
0:12 15/12/2012Major shareholders Oxus
Major Shareholders
Shareholder Type Amount % Holding
RAB Capital PLC - 65,000,000 14.84
Zeromax GmbH - 57,897,085 13.21
Flamborough Property Ltd - 21,617,556 4.93
Darwin Strategic Ltd - 17,166,666 3.92
Director Holdings
Name Type Amount % Holding
Richard Shead - 5,944,519 1.36
Oliver Prior - 987,036 0.23
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Metal Tech Limited

14:25 17/11/2012Metal Tech Ltd Casenotes
15 Oct 2012 7:00 am
RNS
AIM Cancellation - Metal-Tech Limited
12 Oct 2012 11:16 am
RNS
Metal-Tech Ltd (MTT) Cancellation of Admission
05 Oct 2012 11:18 am
RNS
Metal-Tech Ltd (MTT) Result of EGM
9:40 am
RNS
Metal-Tech Ltd (MTT) Update on Tender Offer
28 Sep 2012 12:25 pm
RNS
Metal-Tech Ltd (MTT) Update on Tender Offer
14 Sep 2012 11:42 am
RNS
Metal-Tech Ltd (MTT) Exercise of Share Options
03 Sep 2012 7:01 am
RNS
Metal-Tech Ltd (MTT) Tender Offer
7:00 am
RNS
Metal-Tech Ltd (MTT) Notice of EGM
07 Aug 2012 9:31 am
RNS
Metal-Tech Ltd (MTT) Dealings by Director and Substantial Shareholder
06 Aug 2012 7:00 am
RNS
Metal-Tech Ltd (MTT) Interim Results
23 Jul 2012 12:34 pm
RNS
Metal-Tech Ltd (MTT) Banking facilities arrangement
21 Jun 2012 3:48 pm
RNS
Metal-Tech Ltd (MTT) Posting of Report and Accounts
06 Jun 2012 4:40 pm
RNS
Metal-Tech Ltd (MTT) Director/PDMR Shareholding Replacement
4:40 pm
RNS
Metal-Tech Ltd (MTT) Director/PDMR Shareholding Replacement
11 May 2012 11:33 am
RNS
Metal-Tech Ltd (MTT) Final Results
27 Apr 2012 4:11 pm
RNS
Metal-Tech Ltd (MTT) Movement in share price
16 Apr 2012 11:53 am
RNS
Metal-Tech Ltd (MTT) Result of EGM
05 Apr 2012 3:17 pm
RNS
Metal-Tech Ltd (MTT) Dr Graham Lawson
12 Mar 2012 4:27 pm
RNS
Metal-Tech Ltd (MTT) Update on prospective investment in the Company
05 Mar 2012 5:40 pm
RNS
Metal-Tech Ltd (MTT) Notice of EGM
12 Jan 2012 3:54 pm
RNS
Metal-Tech Ltd (MTT) Directorate Change
21 Dec 2011 11:42 am
RNS
Metal-Tech Ltd (MTT) Result of AGM
19 Dec 2011 1:40 pm
RNS
Metal-Tech Ltd (MTT) Directorate Change
09 Dec 2011 5:18 pm
RNS
Metal-Tech Ltd (MTT) Uzbekistan tribunal update
07 Dec 2011 3:18 pm
RNS
Metal-Tech Ltd (MTT) Uzbekistan tribunal update
16 Nov 2011 7:00 am
RNS
Metal-Tech Ltd (MTT) Directorate Change
09 Nov 2011 3:18 pm
RNS
Metal-Tech Ltd (MTT) Notice of AGM
25 Oct 2011 9:13 am
RNS
Metal-Tech Ltd (MTT) Director/PDMR Shareholding
04 Oct 2011 8:00 am
RNS
Metal-Tech Ltd (MTT) Prospective investment in Metal-Tech
26 Sep 2011 3:16 pm
RNS
Metal-Tech Ltd (MTT) Interim Results
12 Sep 2011 3:00 pm
RNS
Metal-Tech Ltd (MTT) Directorate Change
30 Jun 2011 3:53 pm
RNS
Metal-Tech Ltd (MTT) Posting of Report & Accounts
28 Jun 2011 11:30 am
RNS
Metal-Tech Ltd (MTT) Final Results
26 Apr 2011 7:00 am
RNS
Metal-Tech Ltd (MTT) Trading Update
17 Jan 2011 7:00 am
RNS
Metal-Tech Ltd (MTT) Business and Trading Update By Gold or Silver 
0:20 24/09/2012Metal Tech Ltd Case
Original Arbitration Proceeding
Date
Development
February 04, 2010
The Secretary-General registers a request for the institution of arbitration proceedings.
June 28, 2010
The Tribunal is constituted. Its members are: Gabrielle Kaufmann-Kohler (Swiss), President; John Townsend (U.S.); and Claus von Wobeser (Mexican).
August 03, 2010
The Tribunal holds a first session by telephone conference.
November 11, 2010
The Respondent files a memorial on jurisdiction, admissibility and bifurcation.
February 11, 2011
The Claimant files a statement of claim and a counter-memorial on jurisdiction and bifurcation.
February 24, 2011
The Tribunal holds a hearing on the Respondent's request to address its objections to jurisdiction and admissibility as a preliminary question.
March 08, 2011
The Tribunal issues Procedural Order No. 1 concerning the Respondent’s request to address its objections to jurisdiction and admissibility as a preliminary question.
June 02, 2011
The Respondent files a counter-memorial on the merits and a reply on jurisdiction.
July 14, 2011
The Tribunal issues Procedural Order No. 2 concerning production of documents.
September 09, 2011
The Claimant files a reply on the merits and a rejoinder on jurisdiction.
November 23, 2011
The Respondent files a rejoinder on the merits.
December 07, 2011
The Tribunal holds a pre-hearing organizational meeting with the parties by telephone conference.
December 13, 2011
The Tribunal issues Procedural Order No. 3 concerning production of documents, the procedural calendar, and the organization of the hearing on jurisdiction and merits.
December 22, 2011
The Tribunal issues Procedural Order No. 4 concerning production of documents and examination of witnesses.
January 13, 2012
The Tribunal issues Procedural Order No. 5 concerning the PCA’s review of documents, production of documents, and confidentiality.
January 15, 2012
The Tribunal issues Procedural Order No. 6 concerning the organization of the hearing on jurisdiction and merits.
January 23, 2012 - January 28, 2012
The Tribunal holds a hearing on jurisdiction and merits in Washington, D.C.
February 10, 2012
The Tribunal issues Procedural Order No. 7 concerning production of documents and post-hearing briefing.
March 13, 2012
The Tribunal issues Procedural Order No. 8 concerning production of documents.
April 02, 2012
The Tribunal issues Procedural Order No. 9 concerning confidentiality.
April 17, 2012
The Tribunal issues Procedural Order No. 10 concerning the admissibility of evidence and production of documents.
May 21, 2012
The Tribunal holds a pre-hearing organizational meeting with the parties by telephone conference.
May 22, 2012
The Tribunal issues Procedural Order No. 11 concerning certain requests and the organization of the hearing.
May 29, 2012
The Tribunal holds an additional hearing in Washington, D.C.
June 18, 2012
Each party files a post-hearing brief.
July 12, 2012
The Tribunal issues Procedural Order No. 12 concerning the admissibility of evidence.
August 02, 2012
Each party files a reply post-hearing brief.
August 22, 2012
Each party files a reply submission on costs. By Gold or Silver 

1 comment:

  1. The use of an arbitrator to settle a dispute. News and analysis on international arbitration between foreign investors and their host governments. Thanks for sharing information.

    ReplyDelete