Below is a list of readings recommended by lecturers. The list will continue to expand as we receive further suggestions.

Prof. William Park (short bio) | General Course: The Role and the Rule of Law in International Arbitration (outline)

 

Articles

• Lisa Bernstein, “Opting Out of The Legal System”, 21 J. Legal Studies 115 (1992).
• Jack Coe, “Expanded Levels of Review in Light of Hall Street”, in Proceedings of the Annual Meeting (American Society of International Law), Vol. 105, (March 23-26, 2011).
• William W. Park, “Procedural Evolution in Business Arbitration: Three Studies in Change”, in Arbitration of International Business Disputes, (Oxford University Press 2006).
• William W. Park, The Arbitrator’s Jurisdiction to Determine Jurisdiction, in International Arbitration 2006: Back to Basics?, 13 ICCA Congress Series 55 (Kluwer, 2006).
• William W. Park & Alex Yanos, Treaty Obligations and National Law, 58 Hastings Law Rev. 251 (2006).
• William W. Park, “Arbitration in Autumn”, 2 J. Int’l Dispute Settlement 5 (2011). Adapted as “Maturity in Arbitration”, 26 ICSID Review/Foreign Investment Law Journal 1 (2011).
• William W. Park, “Arbitrators and Accuracy”, 1 J. Int’l Dispute Settlement 25 (2010). Adapted with Epilogue as “Truth-Seeking in International Arbitration”, in The Search for Truth in Arbitration, Association Suisse de l’Arbitrage, Special Series No. 35, (JurisNet LLC 2011).
• William W. Park, “Rectitude in International Arbitration”, 27 Arb. Int’l 473 (2011), adapted from “Arbitrator Integrity”, 46 San Diego Law Review 629 (2009). Included as Chapter 9 in The Backlash Against Investor Arbitration: Perceptions and Reality at189, (Kluwer, 2010).
• Derek Roebuck, “Bricks Without Straw: Arbitration in Roman Britain”, 23 Arb Int’l 143 (2007).
• Thomas Schultz, “Concept of Law in Transnational Arbitral Legal Orders and Some of Its Consequences”, 2 J. Int’l Dispute Settlement 59 (2011).

 

 Books

• Jerold S. Auerbach, Justice Without Law ? (Oxford University Press 1983).
• Emmanuel Gaillard, Aspects philosophiques du droit de l’arbitrage international, Hague Academy of International Law, (Martinus Nijhoff 2008).  (see also 2010 English version here)
• Derek Roebuck & Bruno de Loynes de Fumichon, Roman Arbitration (2004).

 

General background materials

INTERNATIONAL

• UNCITRAL, Article V(2)(b), Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, (New York Convention),1958.
• ICSID, Article 52, Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of other States, (Washington Convention), 1965.
•  IBA Rules on theTaking of Evidence in International Arbitration, 2010.
• Abaclat and Others (Case formerly known as Giovanna a Beccara and Others) v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/07/5 (Italy/Argentina BIT):
  • Procedural Order No. 3 (Confidentiality Order), 27 January 2010.
  • Decision on Jurisdiction and Admissibility, 4 August 2011.
  • Dissenting Opinion of Professor Georges Abi-Saab, 28 October 2011 (Note: Document provided by IAReporter).
  • Request for the Disqualification of President Pierre Tercier and Arbitrator Jan van den Berg, 15 September 2011 (English) (Spanish) (Note: Document provided by IAReporter).
  • Recommendation on Proposal for Disqualification, 19 December 2011. (Note: Document provided by IAReporter).

FRANCE

• French Cour de cassation, Première chambre civile, 20 December 1993 (91-16828), Populaire de la Muncipalité de El Mergeb v. Dalico.
• French Cour de cassation, Première chambre civile, 23 March 1994 (92-15.137), Hilmarton Ltd v. OTV.
• Paris Court of Appeal, 1st Chamber, 25 March 2010 (08/23901), La société Commercial Caribbean Niquel v. La société Overseas Mining Investments Limited.
• Paris Court of Appeal, 17 February 2011 (09/28533), Gouvernement du Pakistan – Ministère des affaires religieuses v. Société Dallah Real Estate and Tourism Holding Company.
• French Cour de cassation, Première chambre civile, 29 June 2011 (10-23.321), La société Overseas Mining Investments Limited v. La société Commercial Caribbean Niquel.
• New French Civil Code: Décret n° 2011-48 du 13 janvier 2011.

SWITZERLAND

• Swiss Federal Statute on Private International Law, articles 176-194.

UNITED KINGDOM

• Arbitration Act 1996, §§ 60 & 61.
• Soleimany v. Soleimany [1998] EWCA Civ 285.
• Dallah v. Pakistan [2010] UKSC 46.
• Jivraj v Hashwani, [2011] UKSC 40.
• Rainy Sky v Kookmin Bank [2011] UKSC 50.

UNITED STATES

• The “Fairness Act” S.987 – Arbitration Fairness Act of 2011.
• Amendment Article XI, Massachusetts Constitution, 1833.
• Rhône Méditerranée v. Achille Lauro, 712 F.2d 50, 1983.
• Mitsubishi v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, 473 U.S. 614 (1985).
• New England Energy Inc. v. Keystone Shipping Co., 855 F.2d 1, 1988.
• Kahn-Lucas Lancaster Inc. v. Lark Int’l, 186 F.3d 210,1999.
• Sandvik v. Adventl, 220 F.3d 99, 2000.
• Monégasque de Reassurances v. Naftogaz, 311 F.3d 488, 2002.
• Bechtel v. Dubai, 360 F. Supp. 2d 136, 2005.
• TermoRio S.A. v. Electranta S.P., 487 F.3d 928 , 2007.
• Applied Indus. Materials Corp. v. Ovalar Makine Ticaret Ve Sanayi, A.S., 492 F.3d 132, 2007.
• Hall Street Assocs. LLC v. Mattel Inc., 552 U.S. 576 (2008).
• Arthur Andersen v. Carlisle, 521 F. 3d 597, 2009.
• Schwartzman v. Harlap, 2009 WL 1009856 (E.D.N.Y. 2009), 2009.
• Stolt-Nielsen SA v. AnimalFeeds Int’l, 548 F. 3d 85, 2010.
• AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion, 584 F. 3d 849, 2011.
• In re Am. Exp. Merchants, 634 F.3d 187, 2011.
• Sutter v. Oxford Health Plans, 2012 WL 1088887 (3d Cir. 2012), 2012.
• Bonnant, v. Merrill Lynch, 2012 WL 739363 (2d Cir. 2012) , 2012.
• Argentina v. BG Group, 665 F.3d 1363, 2012.

 

James Castello | Special Course: A Decade of Revisions at UNCITRAL (outline)

Books

• Baker, S. and Davis, M., The UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules in Practice: The Experience of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal (Kluwer 1992).
• Caron, D., Caplan, L. and Pellonpää, M., The UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules: A Commentary (Oxford University Press 2006).
• Caron, D. and Crook, J. (eds), The Iran-U.S. Claims Tribunal and the Process of International Claims Resolution (Transnational Publishers 2000).
• van Hof, J., Commentary on the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules: The Application by the Iran-U.S. Claims Tribunal (Kluwer 1991).
• Holtzmann, H. and Neuhaus, J., A Guide to the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration: Legislative History and Commentary (Kluwer 1989).
• Zuberbühler, T., Müller, C. and Habegger, P. (eds), Swiss Rules of International Arbitration: Commentary (Kluwer/Schulthess 2005).

Articles

• Böckstiegel, K.-H., “The Relevance of National Arbitration Law for Arbitrations under the UNCITRAL Rules” 1(3) J Int’l Arb. (1984).
• Böckstiegel, K.-H., “Applying the UNCITRAL Rules: The Experience of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal’ 4 Int’l Tax and Business Lawyer 266 (1986).
• Caron, D., “Interim Measures of Protection: Theory and Practice in Light of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal” 46 Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht 465 (1986) (in English).
• Castello, J., “Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose: Eight Revisions not Adopted in the 2010 UNCITRAL Rules, 28(4) ASA Bulletin 855 (2010).
• Castello, J., “Unveiling the 2010 UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules,” 65(2-3) Dispute Resolution J. (May-October 2010).
  Castello, J., “Generalizing About The Virtues Of Specificity: The Surprising Evolution Of The Longest Article In The UNCITRAL Model Law,” 6 World Arb. & Mediation Rev. 7 (2012).
• Castello, J., and Digon, R., “Maximizing Possibilities for Joinder in International Arbitration,” in A. Rovine, ed., Contemporary Issues in International Arbitration and Mediation: The Fordham Papers 2011, pp. 104-120 (Martinus Nijhoff 2012).
• *Castello, J., “The UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules” in F. Weigand, ed., The Practioner’s Handbook on International Commercial Arbitration, ch. 16 (Oxford University Press 2009).
• Drymer, S., “The Revised 2010 UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules: New Rules / New Roles for Designating and Appointing Authorities,” 28(4) ASA Bulletin 869 (2010).
• Kaplan, N., “Is the Need for Writing as Expressed in the New York Convention and the Model Law out of Step with Commercial Practice?” 12 Arb. Int’l 28 (1996).
• Petrochilos, G., “Interim Measures under the Revised UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules,” 28(4) ASA Bulletin 878 (2010)
  Sanders, P., “Commentary on UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules,” II Ybk Commercial Arb.172  (1977).
• Sanders, P., “Has the Moment Come to Revise the Arbitration Rules of UNCITRAL?” 20(3) Arb Int’l 243 (2004).
• Schneider, M., “The Revision of the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules: Some Observations on the Process and the Results,” 2011 Paris J. of Int’l Arb. 903.

Source Materials

• Iran-United States Claims Tribunal Reports (Grotius Publications 1981 –  ) (38 vols. to date)
• UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration (1985 & 2006 versions)
• UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules (1976 and *2010 versions)*A copy of the two asterisked items will be given out to enrolled students at the first lecture.

 

Gabrielle Kaufmann-Kohler (short bio) | Special Course: Parallel Proceedings in International Arbitration (outline)

Articles and book excerpts

• Crawford, James, Treaty and Contract in Investment Arbitration, in: 24(3) Arbitration International (2008), pp. 351-374.
• Reinisch, August, The Issues Raised by Parallel Proceedings and Possible Solutions, in: Michael Waibel / Asha Kaushal / Kyo-Hwa Liz Chung / Claire Balchin, The Backlash against Investment Arbitration, Alphen aan den Rijn, Kluwer Law International, 2010, pp. 113-126.
• Yannaca-Small, Katia, Consolidation of Claims: A Promising Avenue for Investment Arbitration?, in: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), International Investment Perspectives, Paris, OECD, 2006, pp. 225-259.
• Kaufmann-Kohler, Gabrielle / Boisson de Chazournes, Laurence / Bonnin, Victor / Mbengue, Makane, Consolidation of Proceedings in Investment Arbitration: How can Multiple Proceedings Arising from the Same or Related Situations be Handled Efficiently? In ICSID Review Foreign Investment Law Journal, Volume 21, Number 1, spring 2006, pp. 59-125.
• McLachlan, Campbell, Lis Pendens in International Litigation (Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden, 2009), pp. 13-59 (Introduction, Litispendence phenomenon, Intellectual origins of lis pendens); 189-299 (International commercial arbitration, international treaty arbitration); 460-467 (Final Conclusions).

Decisions

• Canfor Corp. v. United States of America, Terminal Forest Products Ltd. v. United States of America and Tembec Inc. et al. v. United States of America, Order of the Consolidation Tribunal, 7 September 2005 [59-225].
• Compañia de Aquas del Aconquija, S.A. and Vivendi Universal (formerly Compagnie Générale des Eaux) v. Argentine Republic, Case No. ARB/97/3, Decision on Annulment of 3 July 2002 [93-115].
• CME Czech Republic BV v. The Czech Republic, UNCITRAL, Partial Award of 13 September 2001 [1-22; 401-419].
• Lauder v. The Czech Republic, UNCITRAL, Final Award 3 September 2001 [1-10; 43-152; 156-180].
• Abaclat and Others (Case formerly known as Giovanna a Beccara and Others) v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/07/5, Decision on Jurisdiction and Admissibility (Aug. 4, 2011) [316-332; 388-422; 423-466; 467-500].
• Abaclat and Others (Case formerly known as Giovanna a Beccara and Others) v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/07/5, Professor Georges Abi-Saab, Dissenting Opinion (Oct. 28, 2011) [120-175].

 

Eric Loquin | Sports Law Arbitration (outline)

Ouvrages

• Chaussard, C., Les voies de règlement des litiges sportifs, thèse Dijon, 2006, dactyl
• Latty F., La lex sportiva, recherche sur le droit transnational, thèse Paris X, 2005, dactyl
• Maisonneuve M., L’arbitrage des litiges sportifs, LGDL, 2011
• Rigozzi A., L’arbitrage international en matière de sport, Helbing, Lichtenhahn, Bâle 2005
• Simon G., Puissance sportive  et ordre juridique sportif, LGDJ, 1990

Articles

• Buy F., “La justice sportive”, Cahiers de Droit du sport, n°2, 2005, p. 13
• Karaquillo J-P., “Droit international du sport”, RCADI, La Haye, vol. 309, 2004, p. 9
• Kaufmann-Kolher G., “Atlanta et l’arbitrage ou les premières expériences de la Division olympique du Tribunal arbitral du sport”, Bull. ASA, 1996, p. 433
• Kaufmann-Kohler, G., “Nagano et l’arbitrage où vers une justice de proximité”, Bull. ASA, 1998, p. 311.
• Loquin E., “Ethique, commerce et sport”, in Actes du colloque d’Alexandrie, avril 2005, Bruylant, 2006.
• Loquin E., “L’utilisation  par les arbitres du TAS des principes généraux du droit et le développement d’une Lex sportiva”, in Rigozzi A. and Bernasconi M. (eds), The proceeding before the Court of arbitration for sport, Bern, Ed. Weblaw, 2007, pp. 85-108.
• Loquin E., Simon G., “Chronique des sentences du Tribunal arbitral  du sport”, in Journal du Droit international (Clunet) 2001, pp. 235-347,
• Loquin E., Simon G., Hascher D., “Chronique des sentences du Tribunal arbitral  du sport”, in Journal du Droit international (Clunet), 2002, pp. 321 et s.
• Loquin E., Simon G., Hascher D., “Chronique des sentences du Tribunal arbitral  du sport”, in Journal du Droit international (Clunet), 2003, pp. 263 et s.
• Loquin E., Hascher D., “Chronique des sentences du Tribunal arbitral  du sport”, in Journal du Droit international (Clunet), 2004, pp. 289 et s.
• Loquin E., Hascher D., “Chronique des sentences du Tribunal arbitral  du sport”, in Journal du Droit international (Clunet), 2005, pp. 1301-1337
• Loquin E., Hascher D., “Chronique des sentences du Tribunal arbitral  du sport”, in Journal du Droit international (Clunet), 2007, pp. 192-254
• Loquin E., Hascher D., “Chronique des sentences du Tribunal arbitral  du sport”, in Journal du Droit international (Clunet), 2008, pp. 233-309
• Loquin E., Hascher D., “Chronique des sentences du Tribunal arbitral  du sport”, in Journal du Droit international (Clunet), 2009, pp. 255 et s.
• Loquin E., Hascher D., “Chronique des sentences du Tribunal arbitral  du sport”, in Journal du Droit international (Clunet), 2010, pp. 179-246
• Loquin E., “Chronique des sentences du Tribunal arbitral  du sport”, in Journal du Droit international (Clunet), 2011, pp. 180-246
• Mbaye K., “Une nouvelle institution d’arbitrage, le Tribunal arbitral des sports”, Ann. Fr. dr. intern. 1984, p. 409
• Simon G., “L’arbitrage des conflits sportifs”, Rev. arb. 1995, 185 et s.
• Simon G., “Existe-t-il un ordre juridique du sport”, Droits, 2001, n° 33, pp. 97 et s.

 

W. Michael Reisman (short bio) | International Investment Law Amidst Global Change (outline)

Prof. Hi-Taek Shin | Special Course: Investment Treaty Practice of China, Japan and Korea (outline)

• S. Hamamoto, “A Passive Player in International Investment Law: Typically Japanese?” in Bath V and Nottage L. (eds) Foreign Investment and Dispute Resolution Law and Practice in Asia (London: Routledge, 2011), pp. 53-67.
• S. Hamamoto, “Japan”, in W Shan, (ed.) International Congress of Comparative Law: The Protection of Foreign Investment (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2012).
• S. Hamamoto and L. Nottage, “Foreign Investment In and Out of Japan: Economic Backdrop, Domestic Law, and International Treaty-Based Investor-State Dispute Resolution” Sydney Law School Research Paper No. 10/145 (2010) in Transnational Dispute Management, 5 (2011)).
• L. Nottage and K. Miles, “Revising Investor-State Arbitration Rules in Australia and Japan to Meet Public Interests”, in Nottage L. and Garnett R. (eds) International Arbitration in Australia (Sydney: Federation Press, 2010), pp. 222-52.
• Wenhua Shan and Norah Gallagher, Chinese Investment Treaties: Policy and Practice (Oxford University Press, 2009)
• Wenhua Shan, The Legal Framework of EU-China Investment Relations: A Critical Appraisal (Hart Publishing, Oxford 2005)
• Hi-Taek Shin, Korean chapter in Commentaries on Selected Model Investment Treaties (C. Brown and D. Krishan eds, Oxford University Press, 2012)
• D Sugihara, “Investment Chapter of the Japan-Switzerland Free Trade Economic Partnership Agreement (JSFTEPA)” (2010) 53 Japanese Yearbook of International Law 122-148.
• US Government Accountability Office (February 2008), “Foreign Investment: Laws and Policies Regulating Foreign Investment in 10 Countries” GAO-08-320 Washington DC.
• S. Yanase, “Bilateral Treaties of Japan and Resolution of Disputes with Respect to Foreign Direct Investment” in van den Berg, A. (ed) International Commercial Arbitration: Important Contemporary Issues (The Hague, Kluwer, 2003).
• Tza Yap Shum v Peru (ICSID Case No ARB/07/6, Decision on Jurisdiction and Competence of 19 June 2009, Award of 7 July 2011)
• Tza Yap Shum v Peru (ICSID Case No ARB/07/6 Award, 7 July 2011)
• Ekran Berhad v People’s Republic of China (ICSID Case No. ARB/11/15)
• China Heilongjiang International Economic & Technical Cooperative Corp., et al v. Mongolia PCA Case (China/Mongolia BIT 1991)

 

Ricardo Feris | Workshop 1: ICC Arbitration practice (outline & Presentation)

 

Martina Polasek | Workshop 2: ICSID Arbitration practice (outline)

Primary Texts

• ICSID Convention, Regulations and Rules (will be provided during workshop)
• ICSID Caseload – Statistics, Issue 2012-2 (will be provided during workshop)

Textbooks

• Lucy Reed, Jan Paulsson & Nigel Blackaby, Guide To ICSID Arbitration (Kluwer Law International, 2nd ed. 2010).
• Campbell McLachlan, Laurence Shore & Matthew Weiniger, International Investment Arbitration: Substantive Principles (Oxford University Press 2007)
• Christopher Dugan, Noah D. Rubins, Don Wallace & Borzu Sabahi, Investor-State Arbitration (Oxford University Press 2008)
• Emmanuel Gaillard, La Jurisprudence du CIRDI (2 volumes, Editions A. Pedone, 2004 and 2010)
• Rudolph Dolzer & Christoph Schreuer, Principles of International Investment Law (Oxford University Press 2008)
• Christoph Schreuer, Loretta Malintoppi, August Reinisch & Anthony Sinclair, The ICSID Convention: A Commentary (Cambridge University Press, 2nd ed. 2009)
• Zachary Douglas, The International Law of Investment Claims (Cambridge University Press 2009)
• Peter Muchlinski, Federico Ortino, & Christoph Schreuer eds., The Oxford Handbook of International Investment Law (Oxford University Press 2008)
• Emmanuel Gaillard ed., The Review of International Arbitral Awards (IAI series on international arbitration n° 6, JurisNet 2010)

Selected Articles

• Jan Paulsson, “Arbitration Without Privity”, 10 ICSID Review—FILJ 232 (1995)
• Christoph Schreuer, “Consent to Arbitration” (2007), available at http://www.univie.ac.at/intlaw/con_arbitr_89.pdf
• David D. Caron, “The Interpretation of National Foreign Investment Laws as Unilateral Acts under International Law”, in Looking to the Future: Essays on International Law in Honor of W. Michael Reisman 649 (Martinus Nijhoff 2010)
• Aron Broches, “Observations on the Finality of ICSID Awards”, 6 ICSID Review—FILJ 312 (1991)
• Gabriela Alvarez Avila, “ICSID Annulment Procedure: A Balancing Exercise Between Correctness and Finality”, in Albert Jan van den Berg ed., Arbitration Advocacy in Changing Times, 15 ICCA Congress Series 289 (Kluwer Law International 2011)
• Katia Yannaca-Small, “Annulment of ICSID Awards: Limited Scope But is there Potential?”, in Katia Yannaca-Small ed., Arbitration Under International Investment Agreements: A Guide to the Key Issues 635 (Oxford University Press 2010).
• Christoph Schreuer, “From ICSID Annulment to Appeal, Half Way Down the Slippery Slope”, 10 The Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals 211 (2011)

Johan Lundstedt | Workshop 3: SCC Arbitration practice (outline)

Primary texts

• SCC Arbitration Rules 2010.
• SCC Rules for Expedited Arbitrations 2010.
• The Swedish Arbitration Act (SFS 1999:116).

Articles

• James Hope, “Why choose Stockholm”, available online at the SCC website
• Per Runeland, “Sweden Thrives As a Neutral Arbitration Ground”
• Annette Magnusson and Patricia Shaughnessy, “The 2007 Arbitration Rules of the Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce”,available online at the SCC website
• Patricia Shaughnessy, “The New SCC Emergency Arbitrator Rules”, Chapter 33, Between East and West: Essays in Honour of Ulf Franke.

Case Law (all to be found at http://www.jpinfonet.se/Swedish-Arbitration-Portal/)

• “Bulbank” – Judgment of the Swedish Supreme Court, T 1881-99
• “Petrobart” – Judgment of the Swedish Supreme Court, T 2113-06
• “Rosinvest” – Decision of the Swedish Supreme Court, Ö 2301-09
• “Korsnas” – Judgment of the Swedish Supreme Court, T 156-09

Brooks W. Daly | Seminar: State-to-State Arbitration (outline)

Reading List

• Brooks W. Daly, “The Permanent Court of Arbitration”, in C. Giorgetti (ed.), The Rules, Practice, and Jurisprudence of International Courts and Tribunals” (Martinus Nijhoff Publishers 2012), pp. 37-73
• Thomas Willing Balch, The Alabama Arbitration (Allen, Lane & Scott, 1900)
• Robert Jennings, “The differences between conducting a case in the ICJ and in an Ad Hoc Arbitration Tribunal: An Inside View,” in Liber Amicorum Judge Shigeru Oda Vol 2., at 893 (Nisuke Ando et. al. eds., 2002).
• Final Award of February 24, 2004, Guyana v. Suriname, Permanent Court of Arbitration.
• Final Award of July 22, 2009, Abyei Arbitration, Permanent Court of Arbitration.
• Brooks W. Daly, “The Abyei Arbitration: Procedural Aspects of an Intra-State Border Arbitration,” in Leiden Journal of International Law, Vol. 23, Issue 4, at 801 (2010).
• Reasoned Decision on Challenge to H.E. Judge Sir Christopher Greenwood, The Republic of Mauritius v. The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

Reference and Further Background Reading

• International Bar Association Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration (2010)
• Permanent Court of Arbitration Optional Rules for Arbitration between Two States (1992)
• International Bar Association Guidelines on the Conflicts of Interest in International Arbitration (2004)
• UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules, G.A. Res. 31/98, U.N. Doc. A/RES/31/98 (Dec. 15, 1976) (1976 UNCITRAL Rules)
• UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules, G.A. Res. 65/22, Art. 26, U.N. Doc. A/RES/65/22 (Dec. 6, 2010) (2010 UNCITRAL Rules)
• Arbitration Agreement between The Government of Sudan and The Sudan People’s Liberation Movement / Army on Delimiting Abyei Area
• William E. McDonald “The Pious Fund of the Californias” in The Catholic Historical Review, Vol. 19, No. 4 (Jan., 1934), pp. 427-436
• P. Hamilton, H.C. Requena, L van Scheltinga & B. Shifman, eds., The Permanent Court of Arbitration: International Arbitration and Dispute Resolution: Summaries of Awards, Settlement Agreements and Reports (Kluwer Law International, 1999)
• Belinda Macmahon & Fedelma Claire Smith, eds., Permanent Court of Arbitration Summaries of Awards 1999-2009 (TMC Asser Press, 2010)
• Shabtai Rosenne, The Hague Peace Conferences of 1899 and 1907 and International Arbitration: Reports and Documents (T.M.C. Asser Press, 2001)
• Brooks W. Daly, “The Permanent Court of Arbitration in Indian Treaties: Its Role, Potential Procedural Problems, and Drafting Solutions” in The Indian Journal of International Law: A Quarterly, Vol. 47, Issue 3, at 359.

Renaud Sorieul | Seminar: The Role of UNCITRAL in International Arbitration (outline)

Lecture 1

• The UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration.
• The UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Conciliation.
• The UNCITRAL Recommendation regarding the interpretation of article II (2), and article VII (1), of the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (New York, 1958).
• UNCITRAL Notes on Organizing Arbitral Proceedings.

Lecture 2

• UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules (1976).
• UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules (as revised in 2010).
  All UNCITRAL texts are available for free download here.
• Draft UNCITRAL Recommendations to assist arbitral institutions and other interested bodies with regard to arbitration under the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules (as revised in 2012). (Contained in documents A/CN.9/746 and Addendum – Available for free download here)
• Compilation of Comments by Governments on the draft Recommendations. (Available for free download here)
• Reports of the fifty-third to fifty-sixth sessions Working Group II (Documents A/CN.9/712, A/CN.9/717, A/CN.9/736 and A/CN.9/741 – Available for free download here)