The Arbitration Station: Recent Episodes
Saadia Bhatty, Joel Dahlquist and Brian Kotick
The Arbitration Station is a podcast about international arbitration. It covers both investment and commercial arbitration and contains both serious substance and gossipy gibberish. Hosts Brian Kotick, Saadia Bhatty and Joel Dahlquist.
In this festive special episode, Brian and Joel welcome a notable guest, Hon. Charles N. Brower, to their book club gathering [TIME 05:12]. The episode centers around Judge Brower’s memoir, "Judging Iran: A Memoir of the Hague, the White House, and Life on the Front Line of International Justice." The hosts engage in a deep dive into the Judge's rich experiences and perspectives, exploring his significant journey through various international legal spheres.
Saadia is back! To welcome her back, Brian discusses the relatively recent UK Supreme Court judgement that has caused a shake-up for third-party funders [TIME 02:52]. But are the consequences as far reaching as originally expected? For HFT, Brian and Saadia discuss the "who, what, when and why" for requesting extensions in arbitration [TIME 20:26].
We are happy to welcome Joel back into your ears - albeit briefly - for another great episode. Brian interviews Mark Tushingham from Twenty Essex about two simultaneous decisions handed down by the UK Supreme Court and Privy Council grappling with the interpretation of Section 9 of the Arbitration Act [TIME 04:40]. For HFT, we welcome back Jon Passaro who will coach us on how to invest time now to save time in the future [TIME 28:04].
In this episode, Brian and Jan delve into the nuances of early dismissal applications in international arbitration. They discuss the ethical and strategic considerations that emerge from such applications [TIME 03:05]. During the Happy Fun Time segment, Brian offers his insights on conditional fee arrangements and explores other innovative fee arrangement types between arbitration lawyers and their clients [TIME 20:00].
Brian and Jan are back for another entertaining episode. Brian first interviews Duncan Pickard about recent challenges concerning the representation of Member States at the United Nations [TIME 04:13]. Brian and Jan then react to the contribution from our listenership as they complete the sentence: “You know you work in arbitration when…” [TIME 36:03].
In this packed episode, Brian dives into a thought-provoking discussion with Tim Robbins, exploring the intricacies of efficiency in arbitration [TIME 05:49]. We’re also joined by Simon Camilleri, who brings us keen insights into the Law Commission’s final report on the reform of the English Arbitration Act 1996 [TIME 36:58]. And stick around for our Happy Fun Time segment, where Brian and Jan demystify the utility of programming in our professional undertakings [TIME 59:34].
Groove back into gear, Arbitration Nation, because we are rolling back after our sunny summer siesta! First up, Brian speaks to Andrew Fulton KC and Manuel Casas, as they dive deep into a tale of politics intertwining with international law, the Maduro Saga [TIME 05:22]. For Happy Fun Time, Brian and Jan will be discussing the latest shifts in the WFH policies which are making waves in the legal industry [TIME 30:55].
We hope everyone is enjoying their summer holiday (if you're fortunate enough to have one)! As you relax, we have another great episode for you. First, Brian treats us to a review of the partial annulment of the Khudyan v. Armenia award concerning issues of dual nationality [TIME 6:35]. For HFT, we invite back Jonathan Passaro for another great interview concerning the dreaded annual reviews [TIME 26:47].
Don't forget to register for the 20th Anniversary ICAL Conference in Stockholm here: https://www.icalalumni.org/2023-ical-conference
In Episode 6, Saadia introduces a news-worthy update about the multi-jurisdictional saga regarding the recognition and enforcement of a USD 15 billion arbitration award issued between the heirs of the Sultan of Sulu and Malaysia [TIME 06:16]. Then, for HFT, Brian recounts the trials and tribulations of file sharing and how institutions are adapting their technology to facilitate case management [TIME 25:15].
With a full suite of co-hosts, we tackle a question that has bothered us all: why do people confuse arbitration with arbitrage [TIME 34:12]? But before that, we engage in another Arbitration Book Club discussion, this time based on our reading of Mikaël Schinazi’s book The Three Ages of International Commercial Arbitration [TIME 03:31].
For those who, like us, remain confused please see the following dictionary definitions:
Arbitration: “[t]he formal process of having an outside person, chosen by both sides to a disagreement, end the disagreement“
Arbitrage: “[t]he method on the stock exchange of buying something in one place and selling it in another place at the same time, in order to make a profit from the difference in price in the two places“
In Episode 3, Brian welcomes the first interview of the season, Simon Camilleri [TIME 06:40], who introduces the proposed reforms to the English Arbitration Act of 1996. We discuss the consultation process and our personal views on the need and adequacy of the reforms. Then, for HFT [TIME 27:24], Brian and Saadia discuss how close is too close in the arbitration community - are we victims of challenge paranoia?
We’re back in business, with a slightly changed format: shorter, snappier, and a semi-retired Joel. In this first episode of season 7, we discuss how different aspects of recent technology advancements influences the practice of arbitration. Brian first discusses the development toward decentralised autonomous organisations [TIME 05:27], before the season’s first Happy Fun Time addresses how new AI tools are changing how we conduct arbitration work [TIME 20:08].
Kluwer Arbitration Blog Quiz: According to arbitration historian Derek Roebuck, what practice was widely used during the reign of her majesty Queen Elizabeth I to avoid the involvement of the Crown in disputes? This was one of the questions asked at the first ever live Kluwer Arbitration Blog Quiz. If you are scratching your head for the answer, fear not, we captured the whole event live!
ICCA 2022 Mini-Series - Part 6: Last but certainly not least, Saadia interviews Mahnaz Malik, barrister at Twenty Essex in London. Saadia and Mahnaz discuss whether arbitration is suffering from a mid-life crisis, how the field has evolved since its inception and the key changes we can expect to see in the future.
ICCA 2022 Mini-Series - Part 5: In our fifth instalment, we interviewed a Scottish local (well, sort of). James Hope, a Partner at Vinge in Stockholm, sits down to discuss the progress of fairness and diversity in arbitration. He specifically reflects on the importance of the rule of law, even in war times, and arbitration as being a tool for peace.
ICCA 2022 Mini-Series - Part 4: In our fourth instalment, we spoke to the only sociologist in the room…well, at least one of very few. We sit down with Florian Grisel, Associate Professor of Socio-Legal Studies at Oxford University, who spoke to us about some sociological perspectives of international arbitration. Can arbitration practitioners learn from a dialogue with sociology? Listen to this episode and let us know!
ICCA 2022 Mini-Series - Part 3: In our third instalment, we interview Wolf Von Kumer, a leading independent arbitrator/mediator with Arbitra International. Wolf spoke with Brian about recent developments in the energy sector and how the energy transition will create new opportunities for the use of (mixed mode) mediation in Investor-State disputes.
In our second instalment, we shift our focus to another region - Latin America. Eduardo Zuleta joins us to discuss certain actions of constitutionality that have shaped the practice of both commercial and investment arbitration in the region.
Audio Block
Double-click here to upload or link to a .mp3.
Learn more
Welcome to the ICCA 2022 Mini-Series! Similar to our broadcast from Sydney, we were kindly invited by the organizers of the ICCA 2022 Congress in Edinburgh to participate as media sponsors and broadcast interviews of panelists who spoke at the conference. In the first episode, we wanted to give you an interview that was emblematic of the Congress' theme - the Age of Enlightenment. We interviewed Professor Emilia Onyema about the significant reforms in Africa that have been and will be necessary to render arbitration more effective and to integrate international best practices.
We could not help ourselves – we had to come back with a mid-season special. In this special episode, we talk to Krystyna Khripkova regarding the current state of play for Ukrainian arbitration firms and practitioners, both in Ukraine and abroad [Time 07:42]. We also wanted to take this opportunity to invite anyone and everyone to register for the 2022 ICCA Congress in Edinburgh on 18-21 September 2022 (Register - ICCA 2022 (icca2020.scot)). The podcast is happy to participate as a media sponsor for another amazing event and look forward to meeting all the delegates who can attend.
Five years and 99 episodes later, three co-hosts and one producer/editor sit down to evaluate what we have done so far. We look back to high and low points from earlier episodes, enjoy a few messages from listeners and hear Brian speak offensive mock-French at least three times.
Warning - consider the episode a summer bonus, because there’s very little fresh arbitration content in this one! We will be back after the summer with more of that.
The Arbitration Station is getting very close to the big three digits - Episode 100 is just around the corner. For now, we discuss ordre public/public policy/public order/IPO (there’s some terminology confusion on this point) as well as standard of review based on a recent French court decision on the review of an investment treaty award [TIME: 9:15]. The second topic is related, and concerns how to handle advocacy in arbitrations that involve elements of criminal law [TIME: 32:52]. This week’s Happy Fun Time, finally, involves a discussion about the relationship to your clients [TIME: 48:00].
With no guests and (almost) no preparation, Saadia, Brian and Joel discuss three issues and ask more questions than they are giving answers. First up is the ICC Court’s scrutiny of draft arbitral awards [TIME 10:50], followed by tribunals’ power to disqualify counsel [TIME 29:14]. Happy Fun Time gives the episode its name: how do we plead (and decide cases) based on foreign law, i.e. a law that we are not formally qualified in [TIME: 46:57?
Hola nerd amigos! We talk to Mohammad Tavana about the application of Sharia law in international arbitration [TIME 07:44]. Then Saadia, just back from a trip to Rwanda and Cote d’Ivoire, discusses some of the investment law and arbitration related trends on the African continent, in particular the AfCFTA treaty [TIME 35:46]. Our Happy Fun Time topic gives the episode its name (it could also have been “The Sharia Arbitration” or “The Fifty-Four States”) - what is the status of the billable hour model, for counsel and arbitrators [TIME 01:00:53]?
With Joel on holiday, the others talk about one of the more crucial early steps of any arbitration - the advance on costs [TIME 07:33]. We then interview, much overdue, Dorieke Overduin, Senior Legal Advisor with the Dutch Ministerie van Economische Zaken en Klimaat about her work with drafting the Dutch Model BIT and about the role and function of model BITs more generally [TIME 27:19]. Saadia and Brian also have a happy fun time talking about the Metaverse [TIME 59:33].
We manage to clock in under an hour, by restricting ourselves to two topics. First, we discuss the notion of territory in investment arbitration, from several different angles that cover both annexations and the metaverse [TIME 11:21]. We then discuss experts for Happy Fun Time, more precisely how to shop for them, how to find them and how to replace them in an arbitration TIME[34:14].PS: With eerie timing, the Stabil and other v. Russia award was made public on the same day we recorded, so our statement that all Crimean cases remain unpublished it’s no longer true. The award can be found, among other places, at our favorite IAReporter.
First, we're introducing our new guest correspondent Leonor (familiar to loyal listeners), who talks to Lucy Greenwood about how the Green Pledge has morphed and how it is implemented in the real world [TIME 11:40]
The three co-hosts then discuss an issue which is very top of the international arbitration community’s mind in times of war and sanctions: counsel withdrawal [TIME 38:41].
As always, we try to finish with a very Happy Fun Time, which sees us express some concerns about “pay to play” publications and conferences [TIME 56:49].
No (normal) Arbitration Station episode this week. A country where we all have friends and colleagues - and where there’s a very strong arbitration community - is under attack and we could not bring ourselves to record our prepared segments or have a Happy Fun Time.
There will be reasons to return to the many legal issues arising out of this war, but now is not the time. Now is the time to be human, and to stand with Ukraine.
A few ways to help:
-
Donate to the NGO Save Life or to the special account opened by the National Bank of Ukraine.
-
Join initiatives for lawyers, such as United for Ukraine .
-
Further information about ways to help as a foreigner is here.
After trying for several seasons, Joel manages to finally talk the others into recording a somewhat shorter episode. We achieve this by focusing on only one substantive topic, namely settlements - when, how and why do arbitrations settle [TIME 07:09]? Happy Fun Time is about what to do when you don’t have anything to do, or more precisely: how to allow yourself to relax in an otherwise stressful legal profession [TIME 30:32].
Saadia and Joel sit down to discuss the concept of an investment’s “unity“, inspired by a recent key note speech by Christoph Schreuer [TIME 07:03] This week’s guest is Jonathan Passaro, who left big law to become an executive coach and now uses his experience as an arbitration lawyer to coach other lawyers to become happier and better professionals [TIME 29:14}. Joel then leads Happy Fun Time, trying (and failing) to reconceptualize how we talk about and refer to old cases [TIME 57:08}.
Back from holidays spent in three different places, we talk about the CIArb Framework Guideline on the Use of Technology in International Arbitration [TIME 06:43], which Saadia has read. Brian then interviews Jenna Burton of Raedas, an expert on corporate intelligence who often works in arbitration-related matters [TIME 35:44]. The first Happy Fun Time of 2022 sees us taking on transcript corrections from a practical perspective - how does the presence of an official live record influence the lives of arbitration lawyers [TIME 01:00:20]?
For the final episode of the year, the three co-hosts are in three different cities, engaging in three different topics: Brian first talks about contractual preconditions to arbitration, with a specific focus on the construction sector [TIME 08:49], after which Saadia and Joel interview Michael Waibel, professor at University of Vienna about treaty interpretation [TIME 30:37]. The year’s last Happy Fun Time is a discussion on loyalty, more specifically about brand/employer loyalty: what do you do when a firm splits, or a partner leaves for another firm [TIME 0:1:00:30]?
Happy holidays to all arbitration nerds out there, we’ll be back in 2022!
In a rare example of thematic consistency, all three segments touch on how to behave (and how not to behave) in international arbitration. We first speak to Baiju Vasani of Ivanyan & Partners, who on LinkedIn has been posting an excellent series of mentoring posts for arbitration lawyers [TIME 13:29]. The three co-hosts then discuss the recent ICCA Guidelines on Standards of Practice in International Arbitration [TIME 51:24]. We close out on a Happy Fun Time focused on the occasionally less civil aspects of arbitration - sometimes referred to as guerilla tactics [TIME 01:15:30].
Brian is in Dubai on (arbitration) business and we are all amazed that things are returning to normal, at least for the time being. Saadia opens up the episode with a much-overdue segment on burden of proof/standard of proof [TIME 10:37]. We then speak to James Clanchy, independent arbitrator and Honorary Secretary of the London Maritime Arbitrators Association, about maritime arbitration [TIME 34:43]. This week’s Happy Fun Time [TIME 01:10:58] is about post-pandemic networking - what has changed?
Things are very, very slowly returning to normal in London but we start off with an interview with Paris-based Veronica Korom about something that happened in Luxembourg: the CJEU’s Komstroy decision about the intra-EU applicability of the ECT [TIME 10:10]. Joel then goes down the procedural rabbit hole, discussing various post-award measures beyond set-asides and enforcement, such as interpretation and correction of awards [TIME 45:45], before we close out with a HFT on self-citation: how and when should arbitrators, counsel and academics cite themselves [TIME 01:09:05}?
Somewhat delayed, we’re finally back with Season 6! We try to understand what happened when the DIFC-LCIA (in Dubai) was abolished [TIME 12:18], Brian has talked to Ambassador Keith Harper about indigenous rights and their overlap with dispute resolution [TIME 36:22], and the inaugural Happy Fun Time concerns Anti-Money Laundering - how do these obligations influence real life on the factory floor of arbitration [TIME: 01:04:13]?
We’ll be on the air every other Tuesday for the foreseeable future starting… NOW!
In what we think is episode 84 of the Arbitration Station, we round off Season 5 with an interview with Ucheora Onwuamaegbu about the United Nations Compensation Commission [TIME 12:58]. Then, Saadia has read the 2021 International Arbitration Survey and quizzes the others on what respondents may have to say about the state of international arbitration [TIME 51:37]. The season is concluded by a Happy Fun Time where we discuss some trends and developments from the last season or so [TIME 01:19:36]. We will talk to you again after the summer. Stay safe!
For this episode, we have neatly given ourselves one segment per person. Saadia first talks to Sophie Nappert about ArbTech, a forum of which she is a co-founder [TIME 10:36]. Then, Joel has read and almost understood Advocate General Kokott’s opinion in Poland v. PL Holdings [TIME 41:20]. Brian closes out the episode, with a highly scientific comparative study of the world’s airports - soon, soon we can travel again [TIME 59:24].
After a short break, the Arbitration Station is back with escalation clauses (aka multi-tiered dispute resolution clauses or cooling off-clauses) [TIME 10:57], followed by an interview with Leonor Díaz-Córdova and Natalie Hall about cognitive bias in arbitral decision-making, the subject of an upcoming article of theirs [TIME 38:53]. Happy Fun Time closes us out with a discussion on social media practices for arbitrators and other arbitration practitioners [TIME 01:21:10].
Joel’s book can be bought here, use discount code 71345 at check-out!Read more about the CAS case with the tweeting arbitrator here.
This week’s episode has a focus on mediation, which we attack by speaking to two different experts, who offer different perspectives on this type of arbitration-adjacent dispute resolution: Anne-Karin Grill in Vienna [TIME 12:27] and James Claxton in Kyoto [TIME 48:20]. Hopefully we have now answered our own question from Season 1: “Mediation - who cares?“ We then round off the episode with a Happy Fun Time on the topic Diversity of Diversity [TIME 01:19:53].
PS, The link for Joel’s book is here.
Hello there! This week we talk to Iaroslav Gregirchak, the Ukrainian Deputy Business Ombudsman about the work of that very interesting body [TIME 12:04]. We follow up with a second interview, this one with Andre Luis Monteiro on the cross-section of insolvency arbitration [TIME 49:43]. Happy Fun Time was recorded on International Women’s Day, which prompted us to speak about an ugly creature in the conference-heavy world of arbitration: manels [TIME 01:22:25].PS, The French-language conference which Saadia mentions initially, co-organized by her firm Gide and the African Academy of the Practice of Public International Law is available here.
The Arbitration Station Book Club is back! We have read The Unruly Notion of Abuse of Rights and we’re talking about that book together with none other than its author Jan Paulsson [TIME 0:14:45]. The second segment is some arbitration fundamenta: challenges of arbitrators [0:47:21], which is followed by a Happy Fun Time discussion on paralegals: how to be one, how to manage one and how to appreciate them all [1:18:13]
Winter has come to the UK, but the Arbitration Station is full of hot takes. Saadia and Joel speak to University of Richmond law professor Chiara Giorgetti [TIME 07:13], who was heavily involved in the drafting of the Draft Code of Conduct for Adjudicators in Investor-State Dispute Settlement, issued by ICSID and UNCITRAL (which we first talked about on S04E15). The Draft Code has now received comments from states and other stakeholders and it’s on the table at UNCITRAL this week so the timing is great. Saadia then discusses FDI screening and its intersection with investment disputes [TIME 42:37], before the two law firm employees have a Happy Fun Time talking about filings and what happens to your life during those [TIME 01:07:32].
Well rested from our holiday hiatus, we’re back to tackle some of the truly big issues. First out is investment treaty claims arising out of holocaust survivors’ seized property [TIME 09:03], followed by Rachael O’Grady talking about space arbitration [TIME 30:25]. After opening with the holocaust and space, we go small and end with a Happy Fun Time involving Saadia’s new favorite acronym: ESL, or English as a Second Language [TIME 01:01:03]. What are the challenges facing those of us who work in a non-native language - and what does Brian think of the others’ English?
Before taking some time off, we finish the season with a much-awaited interview with Kaj Hobér [TIME 14:40], conducted at the Swedish Law Day webinar. Then we sign off by following tradition and discussing holiday gifts, both related to arbitration and… less so [TIME 46:10]. Happy Holidays to all, and special thanks to our sponsor IAReporter.Among the potential gifts mentioned:
JOELGirl, Woman, Other
Ducks, Newburyport
Crossing to Safety
BRIANBlue Snowball USB Mic
Long Arm Swivel Clamp
The Last Waltz of the Law of Nations
SAADIA
The unruly notion of Abuse of RightsIdentity and Diversity on the International Bench
Is International Law International?
Brian and Joel talk to David Kasdan, a very experienced court reporter with hundreds of arbitrations under his belt, about the crucial but sometimes overlooked role as transcriber in chief during an arbitration [TIME 11:31]. Saadia then takes us on a trip through the updated ICC and LCIA Rules [TIME 47:11], before we have a Happy Fun Time talking about boutique/spin-off firms - and this week's HFT contains some front-page news [TIME 01:14:08!
If you want to work for Investment Arbitration Reporter, now is your chance. The leading publication is looking for contributors and you can apply here. We use this as a reason to bring publisher and funder Luke Peterson on the air to talk about IAReporter, its history, work and contribution to the field of investment arbitration.
The sound is a bit bad because we’re sitting so far apart (together with editor Jan). Brian has called up damages expert Brent Kaczmarek [TIME 08:25] to benefit from his experience from hundreds of arbitrations. Joel then discusses sovereign immunity from enforcement, and in particular enforcement against central bank assets [TIME 41:48]. During Happy Fun Time we talk about paperless arbitration, a topic which has taken on new relevance in 2020 [01:05:19].
(The Green Pledge can be signed here)
The fourth episode of the season is loaded with two interviews: Toby Landau QC talks about the fallacy of witness evidence in arbitration. Based on his 2010 Kaplan Lecture, he argues that the way we produce and examine witnesses has some inherent flaws [TIME 08:18]. We then interview academic and in-house counsel Cornel Marian about taxation in international (investment) arbitration, a topic on which he has just published a book [TIME 45:16]. The third and more casual segment is about English-centrism, prompted by a recent blog post [TIME 01:21:51].
This week’s episode is focused on arbitration institutions, and more particularly on their function and liability. Under the firm guidance of Saadia, we discuss the liability of arbitration institutions [TIME 09:10], with some concrete examples of institutions being sued. Brian then talks to Eric Tuchmann, General Counsel of the American Arbitration Association [TIME 48:30] about the role of that institution, including examples of litigation involving the AAA. Happy Fun Time is about Pro Bono culture, with an arbitration angle [TIME [01:19:23].
The first interview of Season 5 is with Jeremy Sharpe (https://www.jeremyksharpe.com/), who talks to Joel about the investment law advisory center that is being discussed by UNCITRAL Working Group III [TIME 12:16]. Then Brian dives into an issue which is top of mind in 2020: do parties have a right to a physical hearing [TIME 39:14]. Happy Fun Time is a little gloomy, as Saadia talks about “doom scrolling” and how to avoid it [TIME 01:08:15]. Stay safe, everyone!
Something nice happening in 2020 - the Arbitration Station is back! Seated in London - responsibly spread out - we start off with the recent UK news that international law is not that important after all [TIME 14:20]. We then look back over the summer and discuss some recent developments in treaty-based renewable cases: is Romania the new Spain [TIME 28:42]? We also engage in perhaps the silliest Happy Fun Time in the history of silly Happy Fun Times: we’re casting the ISDS movie [TIME 49:03]! Who plays Schreuer? Who plays GKK? Listen in, we’re back!
With a decimated line-up of hosts, and a Corona-related delay in uploads, we close out the season on a strong note with Joel talking about the enforcement of awards that have been set aside [TIME 11:03] and Brian talking about the treaty to end all* treaties: the plurilateral EU treaty to terminate intra-EU investment BITs [TIME 29:08]. We close out the season with a discussion on domestic legal traditions and their influence in arbitration [TIME 45:07]. Thank you all for this season. Unless the world ends, we intend to be back later in 2020 with a fifth (!) season.
*Not nearly all
We’re all in greater London but of course we’re still not in the same room. Video recording will have to do, as we discuss the recent Draft Code of Conduct for Adjudicators in Investor-State Dispute Settlement, issued by ICSID and UNCITRAL [TIME 13:22], as well as the law governing the arbitration agreement, based on a recent judgment from the Court of Appeal in London [TIME 39:58]. Happy Fun Time gives the episode its name - who wants to be an arbitrator (and how do you become one)? [TIME 01:01:33]
We are still in isolation but at some point we have to stop naming the episodes after that fact. This week, we talk about when and why to bifurcate arbitrations [TIME 09:24], umbrella clauses [TIME 37:20] and about motivating your team and colleagues in a these complicated times [TIME 01:04:58].Stay safe and healthy, arbitration friends!
Still in isolation, we return to some of the things that are currently occupying the arbitration community: what are the effects of our collective quarantine, in particular on hearings? [TIME 07:07] The second segment deals with potential investment treaty claims based on Covid-related measures [TIME 40:52]. For Happy Fun Time, we talk about pay freezes, bonuses and salaries in the wake of a potential recession [TIME 01:08:42].
Mentioned in the episode:
The ICC Guidance Note on Possible Measures Aimed at Mitigating the Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic
The Seoul Protocol on Video Conferencing in International Arbitration
Lucas Bento and Jingtian Chen’s article on Kluwer Arbitration Blog
Federica Paddeu and Kate Parlett’s article on Kluwer Arbitration Blog
Recorded in isolation, we talk to each other as therapy. With all events and meetings cancelled or postponed, we try to simulate the ICC European Conference on International Arbitration by talking about two topics that would have been discussed on panels there (and might be this summer when it takes place): tariff wars and arbitration [TIME 11:20] and the European Green Deal (and the Stockholm Treaty Lab winners can be found here) [TIME 33:03]. We also try our best to remain happy and fun with a discussion on greetings protocol in arbitration: how do you know when and who to hug, kiss on the cheek, shake hands (or rub elbows) with [TIME 58:29]?
Sitting in the same room for once, we talk about transparency in investment arbitration (specifically the tribunal’s power to order it, as highlighted in the majority v. dissent in Rand Investments v. Serbia) [TIME 11:11]. Then, in these Covid times, we talk about how the current virus scare might lead to disputes under force majeure clauses in contracts [TIME 32:53]. Happy Fun Time is (once again) Brian Kotick show - to open plan or not to open plan? [Time 51:45].
This week we spend the most time on the epic battle of the seats currently playing out (again) - London v. Paris as the seat of arbitration, brought to the surface by Kabab-Ji S.A.L v. Kout Food Group in the UK Court of Appeal [TIME 13:23]. Then, for Happy Fun Time, Brian gives us the summary of his doctoral dissertation, which is focused on the profound issue of short commands: how to optimise your drafting in Microsoft Word [TIME 47:26].(The Latham & Watkins Book of Jargon in International Arbitration is here)
Brian tells us about security for costs, a topic relevant for both commercial and investment arbitration [TIME 08:28]. Then follows an interview with Diego Gotis, whom Saadia spoke to in Vienna [TIME 34:14]. The last segment is always a Happy Fun one, this time about tone and culture in the field of arbitration - what we wished someone had told us earlier in our careers…[TIME: 1:08:28].
Also, watch out for the fire alarm at Saadia’s office towards the end!
Back from the holidays, we kick off the new decade with two separate discussions that involve timing: first, the temporal application of investment treaties [TIME 10:02] inspired by a recent arbitral award, secondly when and how can a state’s failure to respect obligations in a commercial arbitration award be the basis for an investment treaty claim [TIME 32:17]? Happy Fun Time then is about our (arbitration-related) resolutions for the new year [TIME 56:29].
Happy holidays, arbitration nerds!
From the International Arbitration Center in London, Brian and Saadia call up Joel and it has to be said: Joel’s audio is below par. It’s a work in progress figuring out recording from a new place.
Luckily, Joel pre-recorded an interview with Kathleen Claussen about WTO dispute resolution and in particular the recent crisis in the Appellate Body [TIME 8:20].
Then Saadia takes us on a tour of the intersection between religion and arbitration [TIME 31:55], before we talk about gift-giving protocols for Happy Fun Time [56:12].
The episode’s substantive segment is the ICSID Roster, and appointments in ICSID cases generally (inspired by a recent blog post about the nationality of arbitrators designated by states) - what is the ICSID Roster, how does one get on it and how does ICSID use it [TIME 12:18]? Then, Happy Fun Time is about law firm pitching/competing for business [TIME 41:57].
Yes, we’re working on a new intro to reflect the arrival of the amazing Saadia Bhatty!
Spread over the world, we fight for the upper hand in our new co-host chemistry. Saadia has interviewed Jaroslav Kudrna [TIME 12:08] from the Czech Ministry of Finance, about the state’s experience as respondent in investment arbitrations. Brian then discusses denial of benefits in investment treaties [TIME 45:34], before we go HFT [TIME 1:06:22] and discuss a question sent in by a listener: what happens when you move jurisdictions?
Saadia and Joel have been to Vienna for the UNCITRAL Working Group, and took the chance to talk to Julian Arato about shareholder claims in investment treaty arbitration [TIME 8:48]. Brian quizzes the others about double-hatters (Joel calls in without a microphone - sorry for sound quality), [TIME 32:58] while HFT is a nerd bonanza on fonts and formatting in legal writing [TIME 1:00:33].
There are three of us! Saadia Bhatty is the new co-host and enters the podcast with full force. This historic episode begins with a discussion about the largest arbitral awards in history [TIME: 11:11], followed by Saadia’s premier segment: institutional v. ad hoc arbitration [TIME 34:05]. For Happy Fun Time, we use World Mental Health Day as a reason to discuss lawyers’ mental health with Elizabeth Rimmer from Lawcare [TIME 1:01:00].[In the discussion on largest awards, Joel is wrong about the costs ordered in the Yukos arbitration: in fact, the state was ordered to pay some $60 million in costs and fees]
In the final episode with only two co-hosts, we call up GDPR oracle Emily Hay for a discussion on how the data protection directive GDPR comes into play in international arbitration. Joel then speculates about arbitral awards as assets - how much do they cost and what rules govern their acquisition? For Happy Fun Time, Brian complains about having to work on vacation, but what is really expected of arbitration lawyers in terms of holiday work?
The Arbitration Station is back in business! A lot has happened over the summer: Jay-Z (almost) has notified Norway of an arbitration, Vannin Capital was sold and Joel got to lecture The Economist in print. We catch up on the summer news, thanks in part to IAReporter’s summer recap. Then, Brian has a few words about the declarations by public officials and how those play into investment arbitration. The first Happy Fun Time of the season: DATING IN ARBITRATION!
In the final episode of Season 3, we spend a little time on investment legislation, and more specifically consent to arbitration located in investment laws [TIME 9:03]. More time is spent on the second iteration of the book club: Joel has re-read Dealing in Virtue and tries to convince Brian that it is a must-read [TIME 30:20]. For the final HFT of the season, we’re joined by two colleagues of Brian’s who tell us about the UK training scheme for qualifying lawyers [TIME 59:50].
The Arbitration Station now goes on summer holiday. Hope to talk to you soon again!
The Arbitration Station is in Washington, to debate the allocation of costs from the podium of a conference. In this episode, we do a dress rehearsal of our respective arguments (should cost follow the event?). We also sneak in some gossip from UNCITRAL Working Group III in New York, as well as a short interview with Alexis Mourre from the ICC. Happy Fun Time closes out the episode, focusing on the impostor syndrome that we all suffer from.
Joel is a doctor now, and we talk about how that happened. Then, the only substantive segment is a big one - non-participating parties (and a little bit about non-participating arbitrators): how is the arbitral procedure affected by the fact that one party does not participate [TIME 23:32]? Happy Fun Time is based on a listener tip: humour in arbitration. Can you be funny in arbitration, and should you try [TIME 56:48]?
In this episode we address two issues that will also be discussed at the 3rd ICC European Conference on International Arbitration on 1 April: sanctions [TIME 12:25] and mandatory rules [TIME 36:53]. The Happy Fun Time segment is devoted to hearing preparations, where Brian has a thing or two to teach Joel about how the real world works for (junior) arbitration counsel [TIME 53:40].
The book club gets a mini-start with Arbitration Without Privity, a classic article by Jan Paulsson [TIME 11:27]. Then, we turn our attention to considerations of proportionality in investment arbitration [TIME 33:49]. Happy Fun Time is about wellness: how to stay healthy and sane in a fast-moving arbitration world? A hint: you do not have to be marathon runner (unless you want to).
Back from a one-week hiatus, we take on two substantive topics: sovereign immunity (from enforcement) [TIME 14:39] and tribunals’ powers to reconsider decisions made during the course of the arbitration [TIME 40:41]. The final segment is HFT, in which we discuss the peculiarities of teaching international arbitration [TIME 58:35].
Mentioned in the episode:
Rishab Raheja
Joel’s IAR analyses of the TANESCO and Perenco cases.
In an extra-long episode, we first cover two specific international instruments: CISG [TIME 14:28] and ICSID AF [TIME 33:20] (two acronyms you should know). The primary reason for the movie-length episode, however, is Happy Fun Time, which this week is about LGBTQ+ issues in the field of arbitration [TIME 50:33]. For this segment, we are rejoined by Quantum Boy Michael Kotrly, as well as several testimonials from listeners sharing their experience.
Joel convinces Brian that service of notice is a sufficiently sexy topic to deserve a segment of its own [TIME 7:34]. Brian then teaches Joel about the group of companies doctrine, based on a recent case from India [Time 27:13]. The Happy Fun Time topic is fake arbitration - how easy is it to manufacture an arbitration or forge an arbitral award? We discuss these questions, based on stories of people who have tried [TIME 46:43].
With the discipline one can only acquire in Big Law, one half of the host duo invites two guests for a holiday special. In Brian’s London office, he talks to Gloria Alvarez and Manuel Casas. First, Gloria focuses on ECT reform in the light of the Achmea judgment [12:10]. Manuel then takes on some recent ICJ case law with relevance for international (investment) arbitration [39:00]. The three then together re-brand HFT as La Hora Feliz, which is about Latin American developments in international arbitration [1:02:04].
With no guests to help out, Brian and Joel try to nail jello to the wall by explaining the outlines of a tribunal’s power to draw adverse inferences [13:28]. The second substantive segment is art arbitration - a topic very much in the news lately [37:49]. For Happy Fun Time [59:07], we go through some of the badly written arbitration clauses which were submitted by listeners, and use that as a basis for a discussion on clause drafting.
FINALLY we get a chance to talk to the Wayne Gretzky of arbitration podcasts - Michael McIlwrath. In addition to a long career as a disputes lawyer at a multinational company, Mike keeps busy on several fronts. Most notably for us, he ran a well-known podcast about alternative dispute resolution, the IDN podcast (found here), between 2007-2011.
In a departure from our typical three topics, we talk to Mike about two things: first, about the Prague Rules, which attempt to insert some “civil law flavour“ into international arbitration. Secondly, we compare notes from our respective podcast experiences. How come IDN was so much better than the Arbitration Station? What has happened with the world of arbitration in the time that has elapsed between our two podcasts? What tips does Mike have for us?
The Procedural Order competition mentioned by Michael can be found here.
We discuss corruption in international arbitration [TIME 14:38]. In the second segment, Brian interviews Philippe Pinsolle about interim measures [TIME 37:00]. In the HFT segment, we discuss local counsel: how are they involved in the arbitration, what is their relationship to international counsel, and – most importantly – are international counsel better than local counsel? [TIME 57:24]
Also: open call for submissions! Send us your favorite bad arbitration clauses to thearbitrationstation @ gmail dot com, and we’ll do a segment on them.
We take on one current topic (issue conflicts) and one more historical (Iran-United States Claims Tribunal). For the latter topic, we are joined by former Tribunal clerk Jawad Ahmad, who also stays on for Happy Fun Time, during which we discuss travel tips and preferences (did you know that Brian keeps a spare double of his toiletries, solely for the purpose of travel?)
We discuss one of the core principles of arbitration, namely the one that provides that arbitrators are competent to determine their own competence [TIME 7:10]. Second, we interview Carita Wallgren-Lindholm about the ICC, Chair of the ICC Arbitration and ADR Commission, in an effort to get a better grasp of how the world’s biggest international arbitration institution works [TIME 27:26] (for this segment, Joel calls in on a conferencing system so we apologize for the level of his interventions, which thankfully are few and short). Happy Fun Time is prompted by Brian’s new job, which he had to interview for: what can he learn Joel, who never had a real job, about job interviews in the arbitration business [TIME 54:58]?
We open strong, by discussing privilege - not our white, male privilege but rather that covering documents and testimony [TIME 8:40]. Brian then interviews Danish arbitrator Niels Schiersing about post-M&A disputes [31:26]. We also have a Happy Fun Time discussing the use of titles: Dr., Mrs., Prince? Madam Arbitrator? First names in email communication? We sort things out for you [TIME 57:28]
FINALLY, Season 3 is up! Joel discusses the exhaustion of local remedies rule, after first having forced Brian to watch a random video connected to the Loewen v. US award (hat tip to IAReporter for pointing its readers to the video). Then Brian interviews Veijo Heiskanen, talking about the issues that have occupied different generations of arbitration lawyers. The first Happy Fun Time of the season concerns “office politics“, for lack of a better word: how to behave, consume alcohol and otherwise interact socially in a professional context.
By the way, just a few days after we recorded this episode, the final award was rendered in Chevron v. Ecuador. The tribunal discussed exhaustion of local remedies, as well as the Loewen award, and would have been a natural focus had we recorded the segment a week later than we did. Go read it!
Season 3 of the Arbitration Station is almost here! In this Teaser, we talk about the plans for our future. They include, among other things, a crowdfunding campaign and a call for a legal researcher.
We also could not keep ourselves from recording a Happy Fun Time segment, addressing the use of Latin phrases in arbitration.
Also mentioned in the episode:
The Swedish Arbitration Days 2018
ICAL Conference 2018: Navigating the Muddy Waters of Modern Arbitration
In this last episode before summer hiatus, we open with a Brian-led discussion on "due process paranoia" [TIME 8:19]. Then we are (finally!) joined by the man who is normally behind the scenes: our editor and arbitration-lawyer-in-his-own-right Jan Kunstyr. First, he concludes the place of arbitration tour with a discussion on Prague [TIME 26:15]. Then, he concludes the entire season by taking over the microphone for Happy Fun Time and asking us questions about ourselves [TIME 49:49].
(And no, we never got to what we like and dislike about each other - we're saving that for Season 3).
Enjoy your summers, arbitration friends!
In a return to the good old format, it’s just the two of us (i.e. no expert guests). The two substantive parts see us discussing the well-known Salini criteria [12:20] and the more practical issue of procedural orders [30:35]. Happy Fun Time is about the unsung heroes of the treaty world: all the international instruments that do not have the glamour of the New York Convention but still might come up in arbitration [47:30].
In the final conversations from Sydney, we first talk to Campbell McLachlan and Matthew Weiniger about the second edition of their book on substantive principles in international investment law. It's been 10 years since the first edition: what has happened during the work with the second [TIME 08:41]? We then talk to Catherine Rogers about Arbitrator Intelligence, which aims to change the process through which arbitrators are appointed, away from the old school phone calls and into the 21st century [TIME 32:08]. The final segment is a Happy Fun Time one. Business development at law firms: what is it and must we all engage in it [TIME 01:10:32]?
Remember that OUP offers our listeners great discounts. You can use them for Campbell's and Matthew's book (both hardback and paperback), as well as for the first edition of Catherine's book Ethics in International Arbitration (hardback and paperback)
Joel is in Copenhagen and Brian is in Amsterdam so the initial segment is recorded remotely, in a way that brings back memories from the early days of DIY audio. Thankfully, most of the episode was recorded in Sydney, where we first talk to ICSID Secretary-General Meg Kinnear about ISDS reform and ICSID's role in it [TIME 9:27]. Next, Ben Hayward discusses conflict of laws in international commercial arbitration (he has a great book out - watch this space for discount code if you're interested in it) [TIME 35:12]. Finally, Hugh Carlson discusses AI and cybersecurity and how they interact with arbitration [TIME TIME 59:27]. No Happy Fun Time this week - it will be back next week, in the final episode from Sydney (we think).
Still in Sydney, we talk to three heavy-weights: Christophe Bondy is first out, discussing his experience representing states in investment arbitration. Then, Stavros Brekoulakis talks to us about public-private arbitration (for an article on the topic, see here). Finally, Susan Franck focuses on costs in international arbitration.
In our second episode from Sydney, we have three conversations with ICCA speakers. First, Wendy Miles and Nicola Swan discuss issues relating to CORE, a Canadian ombudsman for responsible corporations. Second, Claus von Wobeser reflects on a 40-year long career. The third segment, finally, is technically no Happy Fun Time, although Mark Kantor does a good job of entertaining us when discussing the use of arbitration in employment contracts, including over matters of discrimination and harassment (and yes, The Stormy Arbitration pops up again.)
In the first episode from the Sydney ICCA Congress, we come out strong. We interview Donald Donovan and Gabrielle Kaufmann-Kohler, outgoing and incoming ICCA president respectively, about the organization and their visions for it. Then, Brian talks to Sydney-based Max Bonnell about arbitration in our host city. Finally, we stick to HFT tradition and talk about grammar rules and drafting styles, in a session recorded in our hotel room.
We've arrived in Sydney for the 2018 ICCA Congress! However, this week's episode does not focus on the Congress (but don't worry - there will be plenty of that soon). Instead, we talk to fellow podcaster Leyou Tameru from I-ARB Africa about her work on arbitration in Africa. We stay on topic for our Place of Arbitration series, in which we interview Isaiah Bozimo about Nigeria. Happy Fun Time is, as always, very much off topic, as we discuss law firm rankings, prompted by the publication of the recent GAR 30.
We're preparing for our trip to the ICCA Congress in Sydney, and in the meantime we talk to Victoria Kummer about New York as a place of arbitration (some mediation came up as well). In the second substantive segment we quiz "Canadian-Canadian" Quantum Boy Michael Kotrly about damages in international arbitration - how are they calculated and why are lawyers so bad at calculating? Unfortunately there is a crackling that shows up sometimes when Michael speaks, for which we very much apologize! This week's happy fun time then focuses on billing and various aspects of that practice, from both a law firm and an arbitrator's perspective.
Alexander Foerster takes us on a trip to Germany, to talk about legal culture, German lawyers and the DIS [TIME 4:07]. Then both Brian and Joel discuss the arbitration-related aspects of Stormy Daniel's legal case against what we all assume is the US president [TIME 28:20]. The Happy Fun Time segment, finally, is about internships and their role in our field [TIME 52:38].
Brian talks to Portuguese lawyer Duarte Henriques about arbitration in Lisbon [TIME 8:50], and Joel discusses the use of legal precedent by tribunals [TIME 36:44]. For Happy Fun Time, we give mooties - participants as well as arbitrators - a chance to cure their Vis hangover by talking to Cristen Bauer from the Moot Alumni Association about ways to stay in touch with the moot community [TIME 1:02:40].
On this full-length feature of a podcast episode, Joel talks to Bruno Gelinas-Faucher about the involvement of ICJ judges in investor-state arbitration, prompted by a recent report from the International Institute for Sustainable Investment [TIME 11:01]. For our series on places of arbitration Brian interviews Yasmin Mohammad about the recent English-speaking commercial court in Paris, but since he finally gets to talk to a third party funder, he asks a few questions about that too [TIME 47:50]. Taking things down a few notches, Happy Fun Time deals with how to dress to impress: how should we approach arbitration's silent dress codes [TIME 1:20:00]?
Also mentioned in the episode:
Bruno mentions the article The Revolving Door in International Investment Arbitration, written by Malcolm Langford, Daniel Behn and Runar Hilleren Lie.
In our continued tour around the world we go to Moscow to talk to Roman Zykov about recent reforms in Russian arbitration, Russian arbitration lawyers and a few very interesting war stories from Moscow [TIME 4:18]. We then act as if we know anything about Brexit and its effect on international arbitration [TIME 42:39], but then again who knows anything about what is going to happen? The final segment is a Happy Fun Time discussion inspired by a Kluwer blog post suggesting we start talking about all-male tribunals as "defective" [TIME 59:50].
Inspired by a recent teaching gig, Brian takes a swing at (part of) Joel's research: challenges vs. annulments - what is the difference* [7:20]? For the second stop on our road trip we touch down in Miami, Florida for a conversation with Quinn Smith about Miami as a place of arbitration [33:52 - apologies for the occasional Skype lag; that's on us and not on Quinn]. In the Happy Fun Time segment, finally, we take on the seemingly banal issue of how we're all supposed to pronounce each others' names in this international field of ours [1:01:52].
- In an earlier version of this episode, we only mention four out of five grounds for annulment under Article 52 ICSID Convention - "corruption on behalf of a tribunal member" is left out. We have now updated the audio to reflect that there are in fact five grounds, but we still don't discuss the fifth. Apologies for that and thanks to a thoughtful loyal listener for pointing out the oversight.
In this week's Arbitration Station, Joel talks to Taylor St John about the history of ISDS (an interview he's been waiting to do for a long time). After that, we start off on our Places of Arbitration trip around the world, with a geographically modest jump to neighbouring Helsinki, where Anna-Maria Tamminnen introduced us to the Finnish arbitration community. For Happy Fun Time, we ask ourselves what the proper protocol is when you travel with colleagues.
We're back, baby! In the first episode of Season 2, we set up the "Places of Arbitration" series, which will be a recurring feature of the new season [TIME 32:59]. Part of this is talking to a true expert on the matter: professor Loukas Mistelis, who has done a lot of research on competition among different legal seats [TIME 07:45]. The first Happy Fun Time of 2018 is about the phrase "Arbitration Friendly" - what does it even mean [TIME 40:44]?
Season 2 of the world's best Sweden-based arbitration podcast is almost here. In this short trailer, we let you know what you can expect from the new season, which will be aired starting next Tuesday (February 20).
In the final episode of the year, we wrap up the Arbitration Year 2017 with a quick summary of events from the year. Furthermore, we talk about stay of enforcement pending annulment/set aside of an arbitral award, a topic on which we have just co-written an article. Therefore, Happy Fun Time is devoted to article writing - where, why and with whom.
In the second to last episode of 2017, we address three issues on E: expert witnesses (who are they, how do you prepare them, how much do you pay them), exclusion agreements (where and how can parties opt out of court review) and ethics (which is Happy Fun Time, in case you didn't know that ethics was fun).
Happy holidays fellow arbitration nerds! This week's episode focuses on holiday gifts. If you're unlucky, you will soon be hit with a request for provisional measures, which is customary this time of year. If so, you might enjoy our discussions about this topic, from both the commercial and treaty-based perspective. If not, we have other gifts for you - Happy Fun Time this week is a list of suggested holiday gifts.
Joel is at the Working Group III Meeting in Vienna, where the possibility of ISDS reform is being discussed. He interviews Michele Podestà about a paper that was put before the Working Group, looking comparatively at how international courts and tribunals are composed. The Happy Fun Time is about mediation, or rather: why don't arbitration lawyers care about mediation?
In this week's episode, Brian interviews Shirin Saif about witness examinations, while Joel gives an introductory lecture to UNCITRAL (prompted by the upcoming session in Working Group III - the advanced session will come in next week's episode, when Joel calls in from the Working Group meeting in Vienna). For Happy Fun Time, we display our lack of understanding - and our respect - for the UK system with barristers and Queen's Counsels and what have you.
As advertised earlier, we spend quite some time on dissenting opinions in arbitration - good, bad and ugly ones. Furthermore, can/should arbitrators be compelled to take the witness stand in domestic court, to talk about deliberations? Finally, we have a Happy Fun Time talking about the myriad of professional organisations out there.
To celebrate Brian's recent status as dual citizen, Joel gives him a quiz and also discusses the standing of dual national investors in investment arbitration. The second "substantive" segment sees Brian explaining some do's and don'ts with respect to opening statements. Finally, this week's Happy Fun Time is neither fun nor happy: we discuss #metoo and its implications for the field of international arbitration.
Joel is in The Hague and Brian has just returned from London. The former trip involves an interview with Kendra Magraw about sports arbitration, while Brian's London trip centered on the super-inspiring ITF Conference hosted by BIICL, that he summarizes with starry eyes. For Happy Fun Time, we try to figure out whether there is any meaningful difference between civil law and common law.
We use a recent ICSID decision in which the language was decided by coin toss as a reason to talk about the procedural language in arbitration more generally. Furthermore, we discuss how certain human rights issues interact with international arbitration and for Happy Fun Time, we clarify a thing or two on how to curate your online habits as an arbitration lawyer.
For this episode, we are joined for the entire session by Patricia Shaughnessy. The three of us discuss the relatively recent "summary procedure" instrument that has been added to the tribunal's toolbox by some arbitration institutions. We also spend the majority of the episode talking about Happy Fun Time-stuff related to education and career: is it advisable to do an LLM in international arbitration? How do employers feel about this type of specialised education?
In London, Brian speaks to Simon Wolfe about working with arbitration in a non-traditional firm setting. Back in Sweden, Joel tries to pronounce amicus curiae when talking about third party submissions in arbitration, while this week's Happy Fun Time concerns Jerusalem Arbitration Center.
In this week's episode we talk about appointing arbitrators: what considerations come into play and how do you get information on potential nominees? For Happy Fun Time, we (Brian, mostly) discuss strategies and insights that might be useful now that the problems for the arbitration-related moot competitions are being released.
Joel discusses the importance of the place of arbitration and Brian talks about document production. For Happy Fun Time, we've reviewed some examples when arbitration has been brought up in the pop culture context, such as TV show and podcasts.
Joel calls in from a remote cabin (although it sounds like he's reporting from the front; apologies for the sound quality, it will be better starting next episode) and talks to Brian about costs in international arbitration. Who pays for what and how are the costs distributed? For Happy Fun Time, we humbly give some advice on how to behave at arbitration conferences, now that conference season is coming up.
In the fourth episode, we talk about res judicata/issue preclusion and emergency arbitration. For Happy Fun Time, we argue over which and how many languages are necessary to master in order to succeed in today's arbitration market (spoiler alert: Brian does not consider English to be among them).
The third episode focuses on appointing authorities, as well as the EU's role in the future of investor-state arbitration. For the EU segment we talk to Hannes Lenk, who explains the much-discussed European Court of Justice Opinion 2/15 (although we also ask him about a lot of other stuff related to EU law and arbitration). The HAPPY FUN TIME topic addresses Machine Arbitrators - will they take our jobs?!
In the second episode, we talk to our first guest: Annette Magnusson, Secretary General of the Arbitration Institute at the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (and, as such, the former boss of both of us). We talk to her about diversity in arbitration and the Equal Representation in Arbitration Pledge. Other topics include third party funding and The Bourne Arbitration, i.e. all the cool spy stuff that may be involved in international arbitrations but are not strictly something that most lawyers work with.
In the very first episode of The Arbitration Station, we discuss the use of administrative secretaries, tribunal deliberations and - HAPPY FUN TIME TOPIC - the virtues of doing a PhD in international arbitration.