The Revised IBA Guidelines on Conflicts of Interest in International Arbitration - WAMR 2015 Vol. 9, No. 2

Author(s): 

David Arias

Page Count: 

16 pages

Media Description: 

1 PDF Download

Published: 

July, 2015

Jurisdictions: 

International

Practice Areas: 

Arbitrators and Arbitral Tribunals,

International Character of Dispute,

International Litigation,

International Institutions and Rules,

LCIA,

ICDR,

National Institutions and Rules,

ICC,

PCA,

Arbitral Process,

Selection by Arbitral Institution

Subscribe to download

PDF1.39 MB

$40.00

Add to cart

Description: 

Originally From World Arbitration and Mediation Review (WAMR)

Preview Page

 

I. INTRODUCTION

 

In this presentation, I will first give an overview on the review

process that has led to the 2014 IBA Guidelines on Conflicts of

Interest (the “2014 Guidelines”).1 In particular, my presentation

will provide a summary on the first moves made in the review

process, the methods used to identify special interest issues, and

the final steps taken to incorporate both our research and the

public feedback into the 2014 Guidelines. In addition, I will

explain how the critical matters identified by the Subcommittee

have been dealt with by the 2014 Guidelines and why they are

important. I will then describe all the important features of the

2014 Guidelines.

 

 

As you all know, the previous version of the guidelines was

published in 20042 (the “2004 Guidelines”) so it has already been

ten years since its publication. Over these years, I am sure many

of us have seen those guidelines in action and have considered

whether or not they are accurate to deal with issues arising in this

ever-expanding arbitration world. This thought was, most

certainly, what drove the IBA Arbitration Committee to initiate a

review process of the guidelines back in 2012.

 

 

II. THE REVIEW PROCESS

 

The review process started with the creation of an expanded

Conflicts of Interest Subcommittee (the “Subcommittee”) to

conduct and guide this review process. The goal was to create a

Subcommittee as diverse as possible and judging for what you can

see on slide 1 below, this goal was achieved. Diverse legal

countries, 18 different jurisdictions and a range of perspectives

including counsel, arbitrators, and users were represented in the
Subcommittee.