|08:00-09:30||Registration and welcome coffee|
|08:30-09:30||Breakfast session: Euro-vision: a year in review|
By considering a variety of European jurisdictions, this rapid-fire panel session will comment and analyse key trends and developments that took place over the past year, from legislative changes to the setting aside and enforcement of arbitral awards.
- Marcos Dracos, Barrister, One Essex Court, United Kingdom
- Pierre Pic, Partner, Teynier Pic, France
- Anna Masser, Partner Jones Day, Germany
- Patricia Saiz, International Arbitrator; Associate Professor of International Arbitration, ESADE Law School, Spain; Member, ICC International Court of Arbitration
- Maria Hauser-Morel, Counsel, ICC International Court of Arbitation Paris
|09:30-09:50||Welcome addresses – ICC Arbitration in Europe today and tomorrow|
- Alexis Mourre, President ICC International Court of Arbitration, Paris
- Alexander G. Fessas, Secretary General, ICC International Court of Arbitration; Director, ICC Dispute Resolution Services, Paris
- Abdulqawi Ahmed Yusuf, President, International Court of Justice, The Hague
|11:15-12:15||Roundtable: Intra-European vs Extra-European means for the settlement of investor-State disputes|
This roundtable will discuss the post-Achmea world of investor-State arbitration in Europe and the future of ISDS, covering issues such as res judicata, the scope for the application of ISDS under extra-EU BITs and the ECT, or arbitrator-counsel “double hatting” in investment arbitration. Bail-in measures affecting European banks and means of investor protection will also be commented upon, as well as the myths and realities of the EU and European Court of Human Rights remedies against expropriation and unfair or unequitable treatment.
- Richard Kreindler, Partner, Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton, Frankfurt/New York, Germany/United States; Member, ICC Institute of World Business Law
- Luigi Malferrari, Member, Legal Service, European Commission, Brussels
- Patricia Nacimiento, Partner and Co-head of the German Disputes Group, Herbert Smith Freehills, Germany
- Bartosz Kruzewski, Partner, Clifford Chance, Poland
|14:15-15:15||Oxford style debate: The safeguard of international, European and domestic mandatory rules by arbitral tribunals – practical implications|
Recent case law indicates that mandatory rules, whether set out by instruments of international law (e.g., in the fields of political or economic sanctions, human rights, climate justice), EU law (e.g., in the field of antitrust, agency, financial markets) or domestic law, can either impact arbitrability or enlarge the scope of the award review by courts in the context of setting aside/enforcement proceedings. This interactive Oxford style panel will debate the latest trends and analyse the practical implications they can have on arbitral practice.
- Jan Kleinheisterkamp, Associate Professor of Law, London School of Economics – Department of Law, United Kingdom
- Melissa Magliana, Partner, LALIVE, Switzerland
- Paschalis Paschalidis, Senior Associate, Shearman & Sterling LLP, France
- Massimo Benedettelli, Partner, ArbLit, Italy; Full Professor, International law, Department of Law, University of Bari “Aldo Moro”; Member, ICC International Court of Arbitration
|16:15-17:15||Oxford style debate: The long arm of State justice. Managing documentary evidence obtained through a State’s special powers – ICC experience|
Sharing the ICC experience, this panel will review situations such as:
– the use of evidence obtained by the State through its special investigatory powers, e.g. to investigate potential breaches of tax, crime, antitrust legislation allegedly committed by the counterparty in the arbitration. There is often a low burden of suspicious conduct required to initiate these investigations, yet the State can apply all its apparatus, with wide ranged and unrestricted investigatory powers, and obtain all sorts of evidence, which may be relevant to other proceedings involving the State. How should the arbitral tribunal deal with such situations in which the counterparty’s ability to gather evidence is so unbalanced?
– The use of evidence obtained by the State through domestic judicial/administrative proceedings initiated by the State against the counterparty in the arbitration.
– Parallel proceedings: the use of evidence obtained by a party through its participation in domestic proceedings, initiated by the State.
- Anne-Karin Grill, Partner, Vavrovsky Heine Marth Attorneys-at-Law, Austria; Member, ICC International Court of Arbitration
- Fernando Mantilla-Serrano, Partner, Latham & Watkins, France
- Eric A. Schwartz, Independent Arbitrator, France/United Kingdom/United States; Vice Chair, ICC Institute of World Business Law; Former Secretary General, ICC International Court of Arbitration
- Maria Kostytska, Partner, Winston & Strawn, France/United States
- Ziva Filipic, Managing Counsel, ICC International Court of Arbitration, Paris
- Laetitia de Montalivet, Director, Arbitration and ADR, Europe, ICC International Court of Arbitration, Paris
|19:00-22:00||PAW Opening Cocktail Reception|