Posted in Arbitration Law

NEW TAI RULES 2017 – WELCOME CHANGES FOR THE THAI ARBITRATION INSTITUTE

New update since 2003 with effect from 31/1/2017.

Novelties regard:

  • Art. 23 – Removal of right to challenge appointment of arbitrator in court,
  • Art. 14-15 – Sole arbitrator as default position,
  • Art. 39 – Power to grant interim measures,
  • Art. 4.4 – Service and filing by e-mail
  • Art. 29 – Timetable for the arbitration
  • Art. 13 – Power to consolidate proceedings

Source

Posted in Arbitration Law, Consumer Law

Important changes regarding consumer arbitration introduced

Poland: a law recently approved on 17th Jan 2017 intertwines Consumer Law and Arbitration.

Here, an arbitration agreement in a contract with a consumer is presumed to be an unfair contract term and it can only be concluded in writing after the dispute emerges. An additional requirement imposes the parties to acknowledge that they are aware of arbitration’s effects, in particular of the binding effect of the arbitral award or settlement after the state court enforces or recognises them

No exchange of means of communication that enables its content to be recorded is allowed.

You can find some considerations on which Arbitration agreements can harm consumer rights by browsing my previous post in the Arbitration section.

Source

Posted in Arbitration Law

How not to start an arbitration

The Court of London has recently ruled in two decisions deciding two aspects of arbitration:

  • Can a non-signing counterparty be bound by the agreement containing an arbitration clause? And,
  • Which parties are authorised to accept service of arbitration notices?

In the first case, the Court ruled that a non-signing counterparty must grant actual or ostensible authority for a furher counterpartty to sign a contract including an arbitration clause on its behalf. In this case (London Maritime Arbitrators Association Award 13/16), only defining the term ‘merchant’ to include the shipper wasn’t enough.

In the second case, it was stressed out as important is it that a party is authorised  to accept service of arbitration notices. Without such confirmation, service may not be recognised. However, an agent or broker usually grants arbitration notice to its principal and actual receipt of the notice by the principal is regarded as effective.

Source

Posted in Arbitration Law, Litigation

Third-party funding of arbitration: the risks

Another trend lots of legals are not aware of  is the funding of litigation (and prisons) from third parties.

Although on the one hand it allows short-resourced parties to afford litigation, this phenomenon also sets some worrisome issues:

  • firstly, what if “investors” decide to fund only litigation where sucess’ rate is higher?
  • on top of percentages on awarded damages, additional expenses are  required (and render the process less profitable): upfront due-diligence, NDA drafting and  the funding agreement.
  • Although in English litigation, a third-party funder of an unsuccessful litigant could be liable to contribute towards the costs of the other side in proportion to the initial contribution, within arbitration boundaries, this is less clear and it may force the funder to resort to security for its costs.
  • conflict(s) of interest may arise
  • Privilege and confidentiality may vary across countries.

Further issues come along and the question is once again: is more regulation the answer?

Source

Posted in Arbitration Law

2016 in Arbitration Law: Fleeting Victories for Consumer Advocates?

Scalia’s death was only one of the many events that undermined the application of arbitration to consumer contracts. Yet, Trump’s election represents a threat to such balance of rights.

Namely courts created uncertainty around delegation clauses; regarding who can decide the availability of arbitration clauses. Arbitration is also not applicable to famous athletes and well five federal circuits disagreed with NLRB on applicability of Arbitration clauses.

Source

Posted in Arbitration Law, Miscellaneous

Should Your Startup Use Arbitration Agreements?

The article goes (arguably for the yes):

  • you can keep privacy of the matter – unless the employee or the client talks about it to social media (watch out for the confidentiality within the litigation clause)
  • you can save money – arbitration are knowingly expensive. They can be shorter, sure (although it also depends shorter what which country) but are generally more expensive than the public one.\

Source