Conference programme
Conference homeSearch programme
No results were found for the entered search term
- Refined by:
- Arbitration Committee
- Clear all
Monday 5 October (1115 - 1230)
Session details
The IBA Rules of Ethics for International Arbitrators (1987) saw limited adoption compared to other IBA instruments. Meanwhile, arbitration laws and practices have evolved, once again bringing the need for updated and harmonised ethical guidance to the forefront. This panel will explore the need for a unified global standard, and how far those reforms should go.
Arbitration Committee (Lead)
BIC International Trade in Legal Services Committee
Professional Ethics Committee
Session/Workshop Chair(s)
Monday 5 October (1430 - 1545)
Session details
This panel will focus on the critical role that arbitral institutions play in shaping international arbitration. As technology evolves and user expectations shift, institutions are at the forefront of innovation-adapting procedures, launching new initiatives, and addressing emerging concerns. Join us for a forward-looking discussion on what’s next in institutional arbitration, the key developments practitioners should be aware of and the challenges that lie ahead.
Arbitration Committee (Lead)
Session/Workshop Chair(s)
Tuesday 6 October (0930 - 1045)
Session details
As more disputes are resolved by private international arbitration, notably post-transaction disputes and in the construction sector, is this trend impacting the quality and availability of relevant jurisprudence and procedural know-how? What effect does this have on predictability, efficacy and judicial expertise, and what solutions are out there?
Arbitration Committee (Lead)
Judges' Forum
Litigation Committee
Session/Workshop Chair(s)
Tuesday 6 October (1115 - 1230)
Session details
With the geopolitical tensions and increases in defence spending, it is timely to discuss the arbitration of disputes arising in the defence sector. This panel will examine the continued growth of private military contracting, and the emergence of advanced cyber defence technologies, including AI systems. Does the privacy or confidentiality offered by international arbitration make it suited to these disputes, and is arbitration equipped to handle sensitive national-security-related information? Do we need special protocols or frameworks to address the unique challenges posed by this sector?
Arbitration Committee (Lead)
Session/Workshop Chair(s)
Tuesday 6 October (1115 - 1230)
Session details
This panel will explore how advisors to closely held companies can structure cross-border transactions and partnerships in ways that reduce friction. The panel will examine the missteps that can arise when US‑style agreements are deployed in non‑US transactions, including the interpretation of common law concepts by civil law courts, and will address how to choose governing law, including when to select neutral law that is neither the buyer’s nor the seller’s home country law. The panel will also evaluate different choices in arbitration provisions. The panel discussion will include tactical considerations, such as selecting and managing local counsel, coordinating multi‑jurisdictional diligence and reconciling negotiation styles across markets. Finally, the panel will offer practical tips on how to prepare clients for the international components of a transaction (including labour law, regulatory approvals, data protection, tax and other local requirements).
Arbitration Committee
Closely Held Companies Committee (Lead)
Taxes Committee
Session/Workshop Chair(s)
Tuesday 6 October (1115 - 1230)
Session details
The use of AI has become widespread and almost ubiquitous in the community. A number of courts and tribunals have implemented practice directions, striving to balance the advantages of a new technology against the need to observe high ethical standards. Recent cases suggest that both judges and practitioners must be rigorous in the observance of their ethical standards. To what extent do the courts countenance the use of AI? Is it ever appropriate for judges to use AI? Experienced judges and advocates will discuss the proper role for the use of AI in litigation in the higher courts.
Arbitration Committee
Forum for Barristers and Advocates
IBA Legal Policy & Research Unit
Judges' Forum (Lead)
Litigation Committee
Mediation Committee
Session/Workshop Chair(s)
Tuesday 6 October (1615 - 1730)
Session details
International arbitration offers dynamic career paths – but breaking into the field remains a challenge for young practitioners. This discussion will shed light on the evolving landscape of arbitration, mentorship opportunities, and how emerging lawyers can build credibility, networks and expertise early in their careers. Hear from experienced arbitrators and rising stars as they share lessons learned and practical advice for charting your path in this competitive field.
Arbitration Committee
Young Lawyers' Committee (Lead)
Session/Workshop Chair(s)
Tuesday 6 October (1615 - 1730)
Session details
Since the litigation involving BHP and the Ok Tedi mine in Papua New Guinea in the late 1990s, there has been an increasing trend towards recognising litigation funding as well as class actions as effective modes of supporting litigation designed to redress the wrongs associated with environmental harm. Some of these strategies have been mooted in connection with concerns about climate change. Judges and advocates will discuss the trend towards recognising litigation funding across various jurisdictions, as well as the different ways in which class actions have been recognised and supported. How these have been utilised in connection with various types of claims involving litigation over the environment will be addressed and explained, as will the scope for taking gradual advantage of these litigation strategies.
Arbitration Committee
Banking & Financial Law Committee
Class Actions Committee
Energy, Environment, Natural Resources and Infrastructure Law Section (SEERIL)
Forum for Barristers and Advocates
Judges' Forum (Lead)
Litigation Committee
Mediation Committee
Session/Workshop Chair(s)
Wednesday 7 October (1115 - 1230)
Session details
This panel will focus on the pressing issues facing international commercial arbitration practice, procedure, and practitioners.
Arbitration Committee (Lead)
Session/Workshop Chair(s)
Wednesday 7 October (1230 - 1430)
Session details
Join us for our open committee business meeting where all members and Officers are invited to learn more about the current and upcoming activities and developments of the Committee.
Arbitration Committee (Lead)
Wednesday 7 October (1430 - 1545)
Session details
The CJEU's 2022 London Steam-Ship decision exposed a critical gap in the Brussels I Recast Regulation: whilst judgments confirming arbitral awards can prevent recognition of irreconcilable judgments from other Member States, the absence of a lis pendens rule regarding arbitration proceedings creates significant risks of conflicting decisions and undermines legal certainty. The European Commission's 2025 report on the application of the Brussels I Recast Regulation acknowledges such irreconcilability risks and seeks to eliminate it. Against this backdrop, the Sorbonne Research Project has proposed a concrete solution. This panel will explore the diverging approaches across EU jurisdictions to this coordination challenge, examine the practical implications of the London Steam-Ship ruling and critically assess whether the Sorbonne proposal strikes the right balance between party autonomy, judicial efficiency and the fundamental principle of mutual trust underpinning EU civil procedure.
Arbitration Committee
EU Judicial Cooperation Subcommittee
Litigation Committee (Lead)
Session/Workshop Chair(s)
Wednesday 7 October (1615 - 1730)
Session details
This session will look at disputes arising out of the development and integration of AI technology into other products and services, and where issues of liability may involve multiple parties in the AI supply chain all the way to the end-user. What are the advantages and limitations of arbitrating versus litigating these disputes?
Arbitration Committee (Lead)
Litigation Committee
Technology Law Committee
Session/Workshop Chair(s)
Wednesday 7 October (1615 - 1730)
Session details
On 25 July 2024 Justice Rangajeeva Wimalasena, President of the Nauru Court of Appeal, and an AIJA Council member as international observer, presented the Narau Declaration on Judicial Wellbeing to the Regional Judicial Conference on Integrity and Judicial Wellbeing. Eighteen jurisdictions were represented by Chief Justices, Presidents and judicial leaders from 14 countries including England and Wales, the Eastern Caribbean, Canada, Portugal, Nigeria, Ukraine, Jamaica, Papua New Guinea, Tuvalu, Kiribati, Solomon Islands, Singapore and Australia.
Seven principles of judicial wellbeing were recognised. A resolution was presented to the UN General Assembly and an international day for judicial well-being has been recognised. It is appropriate that judges, advocates and those concerned with the wellbeing of the judiciary reflect on the impact of the declaration and the steps taken to address growing awareness about the difficulties judicial officers experience when discharging their functions across a range of jurisdictions.
Arbitration Committee
Forum for Barristers and Advocates
IBA Legal Policy & Research Unit
IBA Professional Wellbeing Commission
Judges' Forum (Lead)
Litigation Committee
Mediation Committee
Session/Workshop Chair(s)
Wednesday 7 October (1900 - 2300)
Arbitration Committee (Lead)
Event sponsored by
Thursday 8 October (1115 - 1230)
Session details
This panel will examine recent developments in the sphere of investment arbitration and treaty practice.
Arbitration Committee (Lead)
Closely Held Companies Committee
Session/Workshop Chair(s)
Thursday 8 October (1430 - 1545)
Session details
In some jurisdictions, sitting judges may concurrently serve as arbitrators. Do such dual roles give rise to challenges in terms of impartiality, procedural integrity and public perception? How do they impact litigation in connection with the arbitration? Do they interfere with the performance of judicial duties? And does it differ from judges acting as mediators? This session explores the rationale behind permitting such roles, the potential benefits and the risks involved, offering comparative insights across jurisdictions.
Arbitration Committee
Class Actions Committee
Dispute Resolution Section (Lead)
Judges' Forum
Litigation Committee
Mediation Committee
Negligence and Damages Committee