Originally from World Arbitration And Mediation Review (WAMR)

Preview Page

20th Annual ITA Workshop

Confronting Ethical Issues in International Arbitration
June 18, 2009

ACT I

KEN REISENFELD: We now turn to Scene II. The interviews are
over. The case is about to begin with Seller’s filing of its Request
for Arbitration. At Stage Right, counsel for Respondent FlyBuy
Airlines learns who has been nominated by Seller as Claimant’s
party-appointed arbitrator. One month later, at Stage Left, Seller’s
counsel finds out who Respondent has chosen. As you will see,
the two parties adopt very different strategic approaches to the
question of arbitrator confirmation and challenges.

ACT I – ETHICAL ISSUES IN SELECTING
THE ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL

ACT I – SCENE II – ARBITRATOR DISCLOSURES AND CHALLENGES
MEETING OF RESPONDENT’S COUNSEL

EDUARDO ZULETA: Tom, thanks very much for seeing me on such
a short notice. We just received Claimant’s Request for Arbitration.
Seller has chosen Professor Hunter as its arbitrator. He is an
exceptionally well-qualified arbitrator, but let me turn to the most
urgent issue for us to discuss, namely his disclosure form.
TOM SIKORA: Eduardo, I cut short my golf game with the minister
himself for you to tell me about some form that the other side has
submitted?
EDUARDO ZULETA: Your golf game is important but yes, let me
explain. Professor Hunter filed what is called a “clean” Statement
of Independence. He checked the box that says there are no facts
or circumstances that need to be disclosed. In the normal course,
he would be confirmed by the Secretary General of the ICC in a
swift, routine procedure. But if we want to raise questions about
his background, we should do so as soon as possible to prevent
his quick confirmation.