LexisNexis
lslaw

Dispute Resolution International (DRI)

About Dispute Resolution International (DRI)

Dispute Resolution International is the journal of the IBA's Dispute Resolution Section. It provides in-depth discussion of current developments and topical issues in all areas of dispute resolution, including litigation, arbitration, mediation and other areas of alternative dispute resolution, as well as negligence and damages.

Dispute Resolution International is edited by Kim Rooney, an independent arbitrator and barrister at Gilt Chambers, Hong Kong. Kim is assisted by an Editorial Board comprising leading practitioners from around the world.

Dispute Resolution International is distributed to all members of the IBA Dispute Resolution Section, giving it a readership of approximately 4,000. It is published twice a year and was launched in May 2007.

If you are interested in contributing to Dispute Resolution International, please contact Kim Rooney at: kim.rooney@giltchambers.com and Zahrah Haider at zahrah.haider@int-bar.org.

If you are not a member of the IBA, you can find out more about how to join here.

If you are interested in advertising in Dispute Resolution International, please email Andrew.Webster-Dunn@int-bar.org

Members of the Dispute Resolution Section committees receive Dispute Resolution International as part of their membership. PDF-only subscriptions are also available to non-members. Please email editor@int-bar.org to order.

ISSN 2075 5333
Pricing: £71 per issue
£144 per year, two issues per year
Five per cent agency discount available on annual subscriptions

Latest Issue - Vol 16 No 1 May 2022

As artificial intelligence (AI) continues to develop, complicated questions arise regarding the scope and role AI technologies play in legal practice. This article identifies and discusses challenges and opportunities that AI’s development pose to legal practice from a US perspective, focusing on AI’s applications to US dispute resolution generally, and to US arbitration in particular. It first discusses problems with defining AI, highlighting competing definitions that conceptualise AI from technical and social perspectives. It then discusses how AI tools currently influence, and will continue to influence, dispute resolution practice in the US. Next, it analyses key US legal considerations influencing how AI will be integrated into US dispute resolution systems, including trends such as how combining a developing technology with an evolving legal landscape is a recipe for uncertainty, and how the variety of relevant actors and sources of law in the US federal system generates complexity when adapting AI tools for use in arbitration. Additionally, it discusses how regulation does not happen in a vacuum, but is coloured by regulatory competition.

Read this article online

The Covid-19 pandemic coincidentally fostered the increasing usage of remote digital technologies like online video conferencing, multimedia presentations and real-time electronic texts in dispute resolution. Despite the remote technology boom, when it comes to the application of broadly phrased ‘AI technologies’ in arbitration, the feeling is that we are navigating uncharted waters. This article aims to introduce a Chinese perspective. Exploring the status quo and the prospects of integrating artificial intelligence (AI) technologies into arbitration, it delineates the emerging new legal ecosystem driven by the interaction of AI and law. In particular, it considers to what extent the development of Chinese internet courts and smart courts could shed light on the integration of AI technologies into the realm of arbitration and the challenges – jurisprudential and ethical – such integration might entail. The article ends with the observation that although AI might never become a constitutive part of the legal profession in the sense of AI technologies, independently of humans, providing legal services or making final binding decisions, this remains a technical possibility and its deep application comes with a variety of ethical implications.

Read this article online

International human rights law (IHRL) and international investment law (IIL) are two influential subsets of public international law reflecting distinct purposes and historical evolutions. Nonetheless, the two subsets interact in the context of the investor–state dispute settlement system (ISDS), due to the rise in human rights claims under international investment agreements. This article appraises this interaction from the perspective of IHRL in light of the fragmentation of public international law. It argues for the need to recognise and assess concurrent international legal obligations systematically and coherently, suggesting that the principle of systemic integration could support the consideration of human rights treaty obligations in ISDS and promote legal accountability. Foreign direct investment and human rights are linked in complex and non-linear ways. Furthermore, a predictable, coherent and transparent legal approach is necessary to ensure that IIL respects substantive and procedural human rights. This may also bolster the legitimacy of ISDS by redressing perceived power imbalances. It may attenuate the potential negative externalities of granting broad, asymmetrical rights to investors without any concomitant obligations under investment treaties. This article concludes that to prevent accountability gaps, tribunals must recognise: (1) a home–host state continuum of human rights legal accountability; (2) home state obligations to protect against third party violations by its investors abroad; and (3) host state obligations to respect, protect and fulfil human rights.

Read this article online

Chinese enterprises and individuals have increasingly become involved in cross-border investigations in relation to extraterritorial enforcement activities or other activities for which provision of information is required by foreign entities. However, under the Chinese legal framework – especially the new 2021 Data Security Law – cross-border provision of information has become increasingly difficult. The provision of such requested information to an entity in a foreign jurisdiction may conflict with mandatory Chinese laws. This article first provides an overview of Chinese legislative framework under the new Data Security Law, the Personal Information Protection Law (PIPL) – both promulgated in 2021 – and the Cybersecurity Law. It includes reference to the definitions of ‘important data’ under the 2017 draft recommended national standard ‘Guidelines for Cross-Border Data Transfer Security Assessments’ and of ‘personal information’ under the PIPL, and the latest consultation on cross-border data transfer security assessment under the Cross-border Data Transfer Security Assessment Measures (Draft for Comment) issued on 29 October 2021. By reference to different scenarios in which a Chinese company or individual may be required by a foreign entity to provide information to it, it then discusses the requirements for evaluating whether any approval from Chinese competent authorities is required, and discusses the criteria for evaluating how, if permissible, the information could be transferred in compliance with Chinese data protection legislation.

Read this article online

Cameron Sim
Oxford University Press (2021)
ISBN: 9780198831051
496 pp
£150 (hardback)

Read this article online

The Global Impact of the Covid-19 Pandemic on Commercial Dispute Resolution in the First Year

While the pandemic disruption has extended for far longer than initially expected, courts (after the first wave), arbitral institutions and stakeholders in commercial dispute resolution have largely continued operations, increasingly supported by innovative digital technology, flexible scheduling and flexible cost structures, among other tools.

Released on Jun 02, 2021

The Global Impact of the Covid-19 Pandemic on Commercial Dispute Resolution in the First Seven Months

In 2020, most of the world’s countries have had to respond to the severe disruption caused by the Covid-19 pandemic, which emerged in late December 2019 (the ‘pandemic’). The pandemic poses enormous health and socio-economic challenges. As of September 2020, it is not known when the pandemic will end; some countries are already experiencing further waves of infection. Globally, judiciaries and arbitral institutions have been under great pressure to continue operating during the pandemic [...]

How to order

Members of the Dispute Resolution Section committees receive Dispute Resolution International as part of their membership. PDF-only subscriptions are also available to non-members. Please email editor@int-bar.org to order.

ISSN 2075 5333
Pricing: £71 per issue
£144 per year, two issues per year
Five per cent agency discount available on annual subscriptions

Guidelines for authors

Copyright and Disclaimer

Copyright: The IBA holds copyright in all articles, newsletters and papers published by them. If you wish to reproduce or distribute any IBA publication or any part of an IBA publication, permission must be requested in writing from the Managing Editor at editor@int-bar.org, and due acknowledgment given.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in journals, newsletters and papers are those of the contributors, and not necessarily those of the International Bar Association.