The Kompetenz-Kompetenz doctrine presumes that an international arbitral tribunal has jurisdiction to assess and decide its own jurisdiction. Legal systems adopt different approaches to the Kompetenz-Kompetenz principle. National arbitration legislation varies regarding the versions of the Kompetenz-Kompetenz principle adopted.[1] The principle involves two types of effects. The positive effect of Kompetenz-Kompetenz is that the arbitral […]
Arbitration in Quebec
Arbitrations seated in Canada are regulated primarily by provincial rather than federal legislation. Each of Canada’s provinces, except for Quebec, has enacted legislation adopting the UNCITRAL Model Law. In Quebec, the Civil Code and Code of Civil Procedure are consistent with the UNCITRAL Model Law. In addition, each province has legislation to regulate domestic commercial […]
Aceris Successfully Resolves ICC Arbitration for Another Client
Aceris Law has assisted another client in obtaining the successful resolution of an ICC arbitration. The ICC arbitration, against a subsidiary of a Fortune 500 steel and mining company, was subject to Liberian law, a common law jurisdiction influenced by American law and the law of other common law jurisdictions. The dispute concerned a service contract […]
Denial of Justice in International Investment Law
The principle of denial of justice embodies the maladministration of justice by local courts.[6] Prohibited acts of the local judiciary mainly revolve around access to justice, discrimination and the slow or non-existent execution of court decisions which are favorable to a foreign investor.[7] One of the oldest and most oft-cited definitions of denial of justice […]
Aceris Achieves American Clients’ Objectives in ICDR Arbitration
Aceris Law has again achieved the outcome sought by its clients, this time in an ICDR arbitration between European claimants and Aceris’ American clients. The ICDR arbitration, initiated by European claimants represented by a large corporate firm, were brought against Aceris’ clients and concerned claims of fraudulent misrepresentation, fraud in the inducement, negligent misrepresentation and unjust […]