GAR Volume 11 - Issue 5
Even if not elected the 45th president of the United States, Donald Trump will be remembered for his campaign and – in the international arbitration community – for his bombastic approach to due process, immortalised by Lucy Reed in this year’s Freshfields lecture. Out of determination to trump their opponents, it appears some international arbitration lawyers are following his approach.
This edition features coverage of the IBA conference in Washington, DC, in the run-up to the election and a major conference in Delhi, which saw the president and prime minister of India – one of the world’s leading economies – make lengthy speeches on ways to improve international arbitration with a view to increasing the ease of doing business in India. The astonishing nature of this only dawned on members of the GAR team in London when we tried to imagine the Prime Minister, Theresa May, devoting even a tiny fraction of a speech to the subject.
Elsewhere, Tiago Duarte-Silva, an economist at Charles River Associates in Boston, and Jorge Mattamouros of King & Spalding in Houston consider the treatment of prejudgment interest in 63 ICSID awards since 2000, which on average added 26 per cent to the damages – and whether the arbitrators gave any thought to the rate applied.
An interview with Beirut-based Nayla Comair-Obeid and Cairo-based Mohamed Abdel Wahab focuses on arbitration of Islamic finance dispute – an area of huge potential growth given the colossal size of the market. And, a report of GAR Live Hong Kong considers the winds of change that are transforming Asian dispute resolution.
In this magazine:
- The Trump approach to due process
- IBA conference: Rivkin’s call for ethics
- India intent
- Survey: prejudgment interest in ICSID awards
- Resolving Islamic finance disputes: Comair-Obeid and Abdel Wahab share insights
- GAR Live Hong Kong: Typhoons of change
- Defending investment arbitration a lost battle
- Quality control
- Ethics maketh counsel and arbitrators
- Time will tell on Brexit
- Crawford on “the ideal arbitrator”