cover image: Commentary+on+2024+IBA+Guidelines+on+Conflicts+of+Interest

Commentary+on+2024+IBA+Guidelines+on+Conflicts+of+Interest

18 Sep 2024

The criterion of ‘direct economic interest’ also allows for considering the relationship between a party and a third-party funder in the light of the influence the third-party funder may or may not have on the appointment of the arbitrator. [...] This change has been accompanied by the deletion of the 2014 version of Waivable Red List, paragraph 2.3.7, which referred to the situation in which the arbitrator regularly advises one of the parties, or an affiliate of one of the parties, but neither the arbitrator nor the arbitrator’s firm derives a significant financial income therefrom. [...] These situations are different from the one in which the arbitrator’s law firm or employer is currently rendering or regularly renders services to one of the parties, or to an affiliate of one of the parties, without creating a significant commercial relationship for the law firm or employer and without the involvement of the arbitrator, and such services do not concern the current dispute (Orange. [...] The second example deals with the situation in which the arbitrator is a lawyer in the same law firm as the counsel to one of the parties. [...] On the other hand, the new provision narrows down the scope of application of the former paragraph 3.5.3 in the 2014 Guidelines in two ways: the first is that it no longer refers to ‘a position’ that the arbitrator holds with the appointing authority with respect to the dispute, but limits its application to cases where the arbitrator holds ‘an executive or other decision-making position’.

Authors

Reviewer

Pages
26
Published in
United Kingdom

Table of Contents