|9:00 - 9:10||WELCOME REMARKS
Matthew Gearing QC, Chairperson of Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre
|9:10 - 9:40||KEYNOTE REMARKS
Professor George Bermann, Professor and Director for the Center for International Commercial and Investment Arbitration (CICIA), Columbia University School of Law
|9:40 - 9:50||INTRODUCTION TO THE 2018 HKIAC ADMINISTERED ARBITRATION RULES|
|9:50 - 10:20||REFRESHMENT BREAK|
|10:20 - 11:35||WHO GOVERNS, WHO DECIDES, AND HOW? ARBITRAL INSTITUTIONS UNDER REVIEW
Arbitral institutions are central actors in international and domestic arbitration communities. They are the treasuries of vast amounts of information. Their decisions directly impact proceedings, can make or break the careers of arbitrators, and influence what it costs parties to resolve their disputes. Users look to them not just for effective case management, but also to lead the development of best practices, usher in new tools, and champion diversity. Given the importance of their various roles, the way institutions are governed and their decision-making processes are under increasing scrutiny.
This session reviews institutional governance and decision-making processes and asks whether there is room for improvement.
|11:35 - 12:00||ONE-ON-ONE SESSION WITH RIMSKY YUEN SC
Interviewed by Neil Kaplan QC, CBE, SBS, Arbitrator, Arbitration Chambers
|12:00 - 12:15||ADDRESS BY THE SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE, MS TERESA CHENG GBS, SC, JP|
|12:15 - 13:30||NETWORKING LUNCHEON|
|13:30 - 14:00||OPTIONS FOR URGENT RELIEF - WHICH ONES ARE MOST EFFECTIVE AND WHEN? (PART I)
Major institutional rules provide several options for parties in need of urgent relief—emergency arbitration, expedited proceedings on the grounds of exceptional urgency, early determination or summary dismissal procedures, applications to tribunals for interim relief. These are in addition to urgent relief available from a competent court. This session takes stock of the multiple options available to parties for urgent relief and analyses what works best, and the considerations that move parties to choose one, another or several of these options (including litigation strategy, cost, delay, enforceability, parallel proceedings, res judicata, and the nature of the available relief).
|14:00 - 15:00||OPTIONS FOR URGENT RELIEF - WHICH ONES ARE MOST EFFECTIVE AND WHEN? (PART II)
Using a case scenario with Hong Kong as the seat, this part of the session showcases a request for interim relief before the Hong Kong courts and a parallel request for interim relief before an arbitral tribunal operating under expedited proceedings.
|15:00 - 15:20||Break|
|15:20 - 16:20||SUMMARY PROCEEDINGS AND THEIR ENFORCEMENT IN ASIA - ARE THEY A POSITIVE DEVELOPMENT?
Major institutional rules provide a mechanism by which manifestly unmeritorious claims may be dismissed in preliminary and summary fashion. Some users welcome such proceedings citing their cost-saving appeal and design to rid proceedings swiftly of baseless claims. Others are concerned that they provide obstructionist parties with another tool to slow proceedings down and that due process shortcuts could lead to invalid and unenforceable awards. Given the ever-growing number of disputes in the construction and financial services sectors in Asia (with an eye on China's Belt and Road Initiative) it is critical to understand whether these concerns are justified. This session looks at the various "summary proceedings" currently on offer, examines issues around their enforcement in Asia and asks whether any revision is required.
|16:20 - 16:30||CLOSING REMARKS|
|Attending only ADR in Asia Conference||Attending more than 1 selected paying event|