International Arbitration

International Arbitration Information by Aceris Law LLC

  • International Arbitration Resources
  • Search Engine
  • Model Request for Arbitration
  • Model Answer to Request for Arbitration
  • Find International Arbitrators
  • Blog
  • Arbitration Laws
  • Arbitration Lawyers
You are here: Home / Annulment of Arbitration Award / Change of Arbitration Attorney under the LCIA Rules

Change of Arbitration Attorney under the LCIA Rules

19/06/2016 by International Arbitration

As before national courts, parties’ right to choose their own arbitration attorney is a fundamental procedural right[1] that is confirmed by Article 18.1 of LCIA Rules (2014)[2]

The new LCIA Rules (2014) represent the first institutional rules that limit this inherent power of the parties, in order to better conduct arbitral proceedings. Article 18.3 of the LCIA Rules states that any change or addition of arbitration attorney after formation of a tribunal needs its approval[3]. Article 18.4 explains the reason of this limitation is to avoid “compromis[ing] the composition of the Arbitral Tribunal”[4].     LCIA arbitration rules

Without exception under institutional rules, prior to the formation of a tribunal, arbitrators must check conflicts of interest with the parties’ arbitration attorney or attorneys. After the formation of the arbitral tribunal, however, any change or addition of an arbitration attorney may still affect a tribunal’s impartiality and independence, leading to the potential annulment of an award that is rendered. An unscrupulous party might even attempt to create a conflict of interest to exclude a tribunal member, by hiring counsel that it knew had a conflict with one or more of the arbitrators in place.

A typical example of this dilemma is the well-known Hrvatska case,[5] where the Hrvatska tribunal excluded the participation of counsel when it learned that counsel and a member of the tribunal were both members of Essex Court Chambers in London. In another case, Romania asked the ICSID Tribunal to exclude counsel Barton Legum who had formerly practiced with an arbitrator at the same law firm. Romania based its challenge on the inherent general powers of ICSID tribunals to “police the integrity of [their] proceedings,” which is rendered unnecessary by the new LCIA Rules.

In practice, the later the change or addition of an arbitration attorney, the more complicated and costly it may be to replace an arbitrator, therefore this change will be less likely to obtain approval. It seems arguable that an in-house lawyer should not be considered as an arbitration lawyer, but rather as a part of his company’s legal entity,[6] although issues of conflicts of interests could nevertheless arise over the course of the arbitration proceedings if in-house legal counsel were changed.

To balance the parties’ fundamental rights to due process with the efficiency of the arbitration proceedings, Article 18.4 list elements that the Tribunal should consider when deciding approval or not of a new arbitration attorney. These include (1) the parties’ right to choose its arbitration attorney, (2) the stage of the arbitral proceedings, (3) the efficiency resulting from maintaining the Tribunal and (4) the waste of cost or time resulting from changing the Tribunal.

  • Yuhua Deng, Aceris Law SARL

[1] Chapter 21: Legal Representation and Professional Conduct in International Arbitration in Gary B. Born , International Commercial Arbitration (Second Edition), 2nd edition (© Kluwer Law International; Kluwer Law International 2014) pp. 2832 – 2894: https://www-kluwerarbitration-com.etna.bib.uvsq.fr/CommonUI/document.aspx?id=KLI-KA-Born-2014-Ch21#a0003

[2] http://www.lcia.org/dispute_resolution_services/lcia-arbitration-rules-2014.aspx

[3] http://www.lcia.org/dispute_resolution_services/lcia-arbitration-rules-2014.aspx

[4] http://www.lcia.org/dispute_resolution_services/lcia-arbitration-rules-2014.aspx

[5] Hrvatska Elektroprivreda d.d. v. Republic of Slovenia, ICSID Case No. ARB/05/24, Decision o f 6 May 2008, at §§33-34: https://icsid.worldbank.org/ICSID/FrontServlet?requestType=CasesRH&actionVal=showDoc&docId=DC950_En&caseId=C69

[6] J.-C. Najar, A Pro Domo Pleading: Of In-House Counsel, and Their Necessary Participation in International Commercial Arbitration, 25 J. Intl Arb. 623-630 (2008): https://www-kluwerarbitration-com.etna.bib.uvsq.fr/CommonUI/document.aspx?id=ipn30633

Filed Under: Annulment of Arbitration Award, Arbitration Award, Arbitration Rules, ICSID Arbitration, International Arbitration Law, LCIA Arbitration, London Arbitration, Oman Arbitration, Romania Arbitration, Slovenia Arbitration, United Kingdom Arbitration

Search Arbitration Information

Armed Conflict and Investment Arbitration

Third-Party Funding for International Arbitration

How to Commence an ICC Arbitration

Arbitration and the Democratic Republic of the Congo

How to Remove an Arbitrator from an Ongoing Arbitration

Aceris Law Defeats Claims in Another ICC Arbitration under English Law

International Arbitration in Italy: 2022 Amendments

Appealing International Arbitration Awards

Translate


Recommended Links

  • Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce
  • International Centre for Dispute Resolution (ICDR)
  • International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)
  • International Chamber of Commerce (ICC)
  • London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA)
  • Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC)
  • United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL)
  • Vienna International Arbitration Centre (VIAC)

About Us

The international arbitration information on this website is sponsored by the international arbitration law firm Aceris Law LLC.

© 2012-2023 · IA