The Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (CIArb) is delighted to welcome Senator Feargal Quinn as Guest of honour to its Annual Lunch at the Clarence Hotel today. Senator Quinn has long been an advocate for placing innovation at the heart of business. In the Senate he has commented that we need to work at making Ireland an easy place to do business to welcome new enterprises.

Senator Quinn is an outstanding business and marketing leader who has set global customer service standards and is a regular keynote speaker at international business conferences. Senator Quinn was elected to the Seanad from the National University of Ireland panel in 1993 and has made a significant contribution in his life as Senator and an entrepreneur and businessman.

Chairman of CIArb Ireland, James P. Halley, especially welcomes the endorsement for dispute resolution that Senator Quinn's involvement today will bring. This follows the significant statement on 11th April 2013 by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Defence, Alan Shatter T.D., at the opening of the Dublin Dispute Resolution as a 'demonstration of confidence in our future and indicative of the type of entrepreneurial thinking and eye of opportunity that Ireland needs as it continues to surmount the challenges that it faces.'

The Dublin Dispute Resolution Centre is a joint venture of the Bar Council of Ireland and the Irish branch of CIArb.

The Chairman of the Irish Branch, James P.Halley is delighted that the project has been brought to fruition. "It involves us in a strategic partnership with the Bar Council which we believe is in our interests into the future. The Centre will be a venue for arbitration, adjudication, mediation and other forms of ADR as well as a range of other branch training and related activities."

The CIArb has more than 700 members in Ireland and Northern Ireland. It is an authority on the regulation, administration, training and promotion of arbitration, mediation and dispute resolution. Uniquely, the multi-disciplinary membership includes practitioners in law, engineering, construction, property, information technology, shipping, finance, insurance, commodities, agriculture, accountancy, medicine and travel. The Institute is global with over 30 Branches with 12,500 members worldwide.

Ends.

For more information contact:

1. Kate O'Shee

E ciarb@arbitration.ie
T +353 (01) 817 5307 F +353 (01) 817 5536
CIArb Ireland
The Distillery Building
145-151 Church Street, Dublin 7
W www.arbitration.ie

2. Anne-Marie Blaney

PR Officer
T 087 6602272

Following the 2010 revision of UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules, and in response to criticism that these rules failed to provide an adequate level of transparency in investment treaty arbitration, the Commission entrusted Working Group II (hereinafter the "Working Group") with the task of developing a legal standard on transparency in treaty-based investor-State arbitration.

At the UNCITRAL 58th Session held in New York from the 4th to the 8th of February 2013, the Working Group agreed on rules on transparency in treaty-based investor-State arbitration (hereinafter the "Rules on Transparency").

The substantive issues facing the Working Group were critical, as they had direct bearing on the impact and effectiveness of the Rules on Transparency. They concerned the following matters: the scope of application of the Rules on Transparency (art. 1); the discretion of the arbitral tribunal in accepting submissions by a non-disputing Party to the treaty (art. 5); whether the hearings should be public under the Rules on Transparency (art. 6); and exceptions to transparency (art. 7).

Given the policy issues involved and the diverging views expressed by a number of delegations, negotiating a compromised solution proved to be a complex and delicate balancing act. It required a significant trade-off between the scope of application of the Rules and the level of transparency to be achieved. This had the necessary (but nonetheless unfortunate) consequence of limiting, de facto, the application of the Rules on Transparency to disputes arising under investment treaties concluded after the adoption of the Rules.

On 7 February 2013, a proposal aimed at resolving all outstanding substantive and policy issues was put forward and unanimously approved by the Working Group. The proposal took the form of a comprehensive package, the most significant elements of which may be summarised as follows:

• Art. 1 "Scope of Application"
In the context of investor-State arbitrations initiated under the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules pursuant to a treaty providing for the protection of investors or investments, the Rules on Transparency:

o shall apply if the treaty was concluded after the effective date of the Rules, and the Parties to the Treaty did not agree otherwise;

o shall not apply if the treaty was concluded before the effective date of the Rules unless (i) the disputing parties agree to the application of the Rules in respect of that arbitration, or (ii) the Parties to the treaty (or in the case of a multilateral treaty, the home State of the investor and the respondent State) have agreed to the application of the Rules on Transparency under that treaty after the effective date of the Rules.
The disputing parties cannot derogate from the Rules on Transparency, unless they are permitted to do so by the treaty.

• Art. 5 "Submission by a non-disputing Party to the treaty"
Subject to paragraph (4), the arbitral tribunal shall accept, or after consultation with the disputing parties may invite, submissions on issues of treaty interpretation from a non-disputing Party to the treaty, when such a submission would not disrupt or unduly burden the arbitral proceedings, or unfairly prejudice any disputing party.

• Art. 6 "Hearings"
Under the Rules on Transparency the hearings at which evidence is presented or oral argument is given shall be public, subject only to the exceptions set forth in paragraphs (2) and (3).

• Art. 7 "Exceptions to transparency"
Confidential or protected information as defined in paragraph (2), or as identified pursuant to arrangements referred to in paragraphs (4) and (5), shall not be made available to the public or to non-disputing Parties to the treaty. It will be the arbitral tribunal's responsibility, in consultation with the disputing parties, (i) to determine whether information is confidential or protected, and (ii) to make suitable arrangements to prevent any confidential or protected information from being made available to the public or to non-disputing Parties; provided, however, that a respondent shall not be required to make available to the public any information the disclosure of which it considers to be contrary to its essential security interests.

The Working Group also agreed that:
• The UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules would require an amendment to article 1(4) in order to create a link with the Rules on Transparency, and that this amendment should result in a new 2013 or 2014 version of the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules.

• In connection with the Repository of published information, the preferred institution to serve as Registry under the Rules on Transparency should be UNCITRAL itself. The International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), or the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague (PCA) will act as suitable alternatives, should UNCITRAL not be in a position to assume that role. The Registry would only publish electronic copies of documents and should enjoy the widest possible immunity in the performance of its duties. Specific provisions were made in connection with the publication of information at the commencement of the arbitral proceedings and the publication of documents.

At the closing of the 58th Session, the Working Group requested the UNCITRAL Secretariat to prepare a draft of revised Rules on Transparency, taking into account the deliberation made by the Working Group, and to circulate the draft to participating Governments for their comments. The Rules on Transparency are expected to undergo final consideration by the Commission at its next session in Vienna from the 8th to the 26th of July 2013, and to be adopted by the Commission at that time.

The Rules on Transparency undoubtedly constitute a significant step forward in connection with UNCITRAL's goal of ensuring transparency in investor-State arbitration. However, the application of the Rules on Transparency to disputes arising under investment treaties concluded prior to the adoption of the Rules remains an open issue, and one which may weigh heavily against the effectiveness of the Rules, ultimately marginalizing their relevance and use.

The request made to the UNCITRAL Secretariat to prepare a draft text, which could then be used by Governments to consent to the application of the Rules on Transparency to disputes arising under existing treaties, is certainly a move in the right direction. Whether such recommendations should take the form of a convention on transparency (which would allow participating States to avoid bilateral negotiations to amend their existing investment treaties), or of a more limited model declaration, will be an issue for consideration by the Commission at the next session in Vienna.

Massimo Fantechi FCIArb

The guest of honour was the Attorney General of Kenya, Hon Prof Githu Muigai FCIArb, who addressed the gathering along with the Branch Chairman Dr Kariuki Muigua. Engineer Peter Scott MCIArb gave a vote of thanks to the guests and members present.

Everyone enjoyed the occasion which was well catered for by the five-star central Nairobi hotel.

He formed his own practice, JE Price & Associates and together with the Leach Partnership also based in Whitchurch, acted for most of the major contractors up and down the country in the 1980s. Ken Salmon recalls being retained by John in the early 1980s to act for a contractor who was in dispute with a local authority. They went to see the borough engineer and solicitor to negotiate deals on a series of 'final accounts'. Ken thought they made a fine team but now accepts that, in truth, John was the one with 'the knowledge'. John was a 'claims consultant' before the term was invented and built up an enviable practice.

Having joined CIArb in 1974 John was admitted as a fellow in 1984. He soon established himself as a well respected arbitrator, someone in whom the parties could have complete confidence. After 1998 John also undertook adjudications under the Construction Act 1996. Later, he became a mediator, a role to which he was readily suited by reason of his vast construction and business experience and equable temperament. John was in reality a man of business who spent most of his time helping people resolve disputes, as comfortable in one dispute resolution role as another.

Although John was a truly gifted Arbitrator and Adjudicator he would probably say that mediation was his preferred means of dispute resolution. Peter Vinden recalls several discussions he had with John at various functions they attended, about the sense of job well done he felt when he conducted a successful mediation. He was always willing to discuss problems with colleagues and he was always on hand to give wise counsel when requested by friends and fellow professionals.

John was passionate about his clients and he built up a long impressive list of leading industry names who would turn to him for his assistance in times of trouble. He could be a fierce opponent at times but he always kept his client's best interest in mind and would always be willing to have sensible "off the record" discussions with his opposite number if he felt this would move things along.

John was an active and valued committee member of the North West Branch of CIArb. He dealt with media matters and was responsible for the publication of the Branch educational articles and newsletters.

Outside of work, John was a keen sailor, taking up dinghy, catamaran and yacht sailing. He was, for most of his life, involved with horses as an owner and competitor. John has also evented horses (dressage, show jumping and cross country) for many years, suffering and recovering from many injuries.

Most of all John will be remembered by all those who knew him as a man of integrity and wit, always ready to help his fellows and with a keen sense of justice. His fellowship and good company we will sorely miss and we extend our sincere condolences to his wife Debbie and his family.

Ends.

By Keith Miller.

What is the purpose of this event?

The purpose is to bring to the attention of Members the fact that Dispute Boards should be considered as an additional ADR tool, to be utalised both for conflict avoidance and conflict management. The Programme is meant very much as informative, giving an overview of what Dispute Boards are and where they might be used.

What is your Background?

I am a lawyer trained and certified both in Canada and in England. I have been an in house council for 25 years and had a keen interest in ADR. Currently I am the European Legal Director for Northrop Grumman. I am also a qualified mediator and a Fellow of the CIArb.

Tell me a little bit about the European General Counsel of Northrop Grumman?

As European GC I am responsible for all of the legal affairs of the company. I manage the legal function and the Corporate Secretarial function in Europe. This includes having to deal with all forms of dispute, hence my interest in ADR as a means to avoid and manage conflict.

What are the key requirements for resolving/settling a dispute effectively?

A good understanding of the facts in issue, bringing the key constituents of the dispute and decision makers together, having a neutral party (parties) to assist in facilitating a settlement by the parties. Having a relationship that the parties wish to continue or salvage also makes the settlement so much easier.

What has been your toughest dispute?

Where an individual's position is based on principle rather than reason, as no amount of neutral persuasion will move them from an interest based position.

What are the differences in making provision/dealing with international and domestic disputes?

Domestic disputes, depending on the jurisdiction, are often best left to State Courts to determine, particularly where there exists a competent, well administered judicial system. Internationally this is not the case. A neutral dispute mechanism has to be used employing all forms of ADR from Dispute Boards, Mediation and Arbitration.

Who should attend the event on 12 March?

Everyone who is interested in learning about a new mechanism to help in dispute avoidance and management. This is useful for outside counsel, business managers and in house counsel

What will attendees/delegates gain from the evening seminar?

An overview of what dispute boards are, how they function and in what circumstances they can be used.

Any additional comment?

Well worth attending to gain additional knowledge and determine whether to get more in depth training.

The focus of the seminar was on managing experts, lawyers and the tribunal to obtain the most cost-effective result. Expert Chartered Quantity Surveyor Chris Ennis spoke with illustrations from experience on the best use of experts: when they should be brought in and how they can best save time and cost. He gave insights into expert attendance at hearings, and hot-tubbing.

From the judicial perspective, chartered arbitrator and former designated Technology and Construction Court judge Frances Kirkham CBE spoke on detailed issues of hearing and document management in construction disputes, including her own experience encouraging non-binding lists of issues, and telephonic case management.

Leading construction solicitor Neal Morris, Pinsents partner, gave a detailed presentation on how to programme cost-effective case management in the client's interests: he explained aspects of claim progression which may be assisted by use of statistical data and electronic techniques, and outsourcing if appropriate.
Leading construction silk and arbitrator Alexander Nissen QC considered recent legal authority on particular costs issues. He highlighted concerns on cost practice in arbitration, discussing and comparing the trend towards cost control in litigation, and noting reported authorities on orders for wasted costs in instances of inadequate document management.

Moderator at the event was London CIArb Branch Chair Margaret Bickford-Smith QC. Lively questions were followed by a Reception at host firm AECOM.

I found the prestige and reputation of CIArb to be the perfect match for what I do in my professional life. The Institute provides an invaluable forum to share knowledge and get to know other professionals in the field.

2. What do you enjoy most about being a Branch Chair?

Feeling the respect people have for the Institute.

3. What do you see as the emerging trends in arbitration for 2013?

I think that arbitration in energy related disputes will be on the rise next year.
Given the increasing interest to arbitration in developing countries and establishment of new arbitration centres, we will see new players and topics in the field of arbitration, which will also increase the competition.

4. What has been your most challenging dispute so far?

Each dispute is challenging indeed, but I was once involved in an arbitration case involving many foreign elements, from firms to individuals and laws of many different countries, about a commercial dispute including bankruptcy, where various types of guerilla tactics were employed by the respondent. I had to not only defend the interests of the client, but also fight with all the guerilla tactics and obstructionist attitudes of the other party. Luckily my clients prevailed in the arbitration!

5. What have been the main highlights for the European Branch in 2012?

I would first say the success in our training courses. The European Branch started its training programmes in 2011 and continued in 2012 with the Introductory Course followed by Module 1 and Module 2 courses in Istanbul, Accelerated Route to Fellowship course in Paris, Module 4 Course in international arbitration and Training for Trainers course in Amsterdam. This resulted not only in increase of membership, but also raising the awareness to the Institute and the European Branch, for which we are very proud of.

Another highlight would be the Branch's annual event which took place in Madrid in April 2012. It was a truly international event with participants from 25 different countries and we thank everyone who worked for the organisation of this event and all those who were with us in Madrid.

6. How do you envisage the European branch expanding over the next two years?

Over the next two years the European Branch plans to increase the number of its members significantly by way of our extensive training course programmes and the events which the Branch and its Chapters either organise or support.

The Branch will continue to support students and young professionals and be involved in the pre-moots to be held in Riga, Tbilisi and The Hague. The Branch will also host the reception at the British Ambassador's Residence on the occasion of the Willem C. Vis Moot in Vienna.

We are very much excited about our training programme for 2013, as we will be holding no less than 21 training courses around the continent. 2013 will be the 3rd year for the European Branch holding training courses. Among these will be Module 1, Module 2 and Module 3 courses in Istanbul and Geneva; Accelerated Route to Membership in Amsterdam and Accelerated Route to Fellowship in Geneva, Introduction to Arbitration courses in Warsaw, Madrid, Geneva, Kiev, Istanbul, Prague , Stockholm and Lisbon; and 5 courses on Introduction to Mediation in Prague, Madrid, Istanbul, Warsaw and Stockholm.

The European Branch will celebrate its 20 year anniversary next year in Lake Como, Tremezzo, where we also will have our annual event on 19-20 April 2013 and I do hope to see many of you there.

7. What are you most passionate about?

I am most passionate about my family and work.

My husband Tolga, who is also a lawyer, has always been a great supporter of me and my work and I am always thankful to him.

I am also passionate about my work. Knowing that your clients are confident in you because you have done your level best to protect their interests whatever the result is and that they have the unconditional trust in you is invaluable.

8. Please describe yourself in three words?

Ambitious, sweet and tough.

I am ambitious about my work and profession.

About being sweet and tough, my surname is Balkaya, which means HoneyRock in Turkish, so I also describe myself sweet as honey and tough as a rock.

9. What is your most favourite city in the world and why?

I travel a lot and have the opportunity to see many different countries, cities and cultures, but Istanbul has always been my favourite city in the world and I see myself lucky because I am living in a city where I most want to live.

Istanbul is a city of charm, history and romance and is magical for so many reasons. It is a great mix of the old and new, ancient and modern, fashion and culture and I am just in love with it!

10. If you weren't a lawyer or working in the field of arbitration what would you be doing?

If I weren't a lawyer, I would be a dentist, like my father.

The official business of the day was to conduct CIArb's Presidential elections for the 2013 Deputy President and Vice President. The three candidates were Charles L Brown FCIArb C.Arb, currently Chairman of the Board of Management, nominated by the South East branch; Phillip W (Whit) Engle FCIArb, nominated by the North America Branch of which he is the Chairman and Michael A Stephens FCIArb, Honorary Treasurer and Trustee of the Institute, nominated by the West Midlands Branch.

The elections were conducted under a weighted Electoral College voting system as laid down by CIArb regulations. The results were declared by the Returning Officer, Anthony Abrahams, CIArb Director General. Phillip Engle received 37 votes, Charles Brown 38 votes and Michael Stephens 49 votes.

Mr Abrahams said: "I am pleased to announce that Michael Stephens and Charles Brown have been duly elected Deputy President and Vice President for 2013 respectively. Mr Stephens will become CIArb President in 2014. Mr Brown will become Deputy President in 2014 then President in 2015, the Institute's centenary year. I am sure their Presidencies will be an outstanding success."

CIArb's centenary year will be marked and celebrated by the publication of a book on the history of the Institute as well as an event in London.

Current CIArb President Jeffrey Elkinson FCIArb C.Arb, will conclude his presidential year on 31 December 2012 and will be succeeded by Vinayak Pradhan FCIArb C.Arb, from 01 January 2013.

Mr Stephens has resigned as Trustee and Honorary Treasurer from 01 January 2013 and Mr Brown will stand down as Chairman of the Board of Management on 01 January 2014 when he takes office as Deputy President.

Ends.

For further information, please contact:
Lucy Chakaodza
Communications and PR Executive
E: LChakaodza@ciarb.org
T: 020 7421 7473
www.ciarb.org

Notes to Editors

1. The Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (CIArb)
CIArb is the world's leading professional membership body for arbitration and alternative dispute resolution. A not-for-profit organisation, CIArb promotes the use of alternative dispute resolution internationally through a membership of 12,500 professionally qualified members in more than 110 countries. In addition to providing education and training for arbitrators, mediators and adjudicators, CIArb acts as an international resource centre for practitioners, policy makers, academics and those in business concerned with the cost-effective and early settlement of disputes. CIArb was originally granted a Royal Charter in 1979. Significant changes to the Institute's governing structure have resulted from the new Charter and Bye-laws granted in 2005, which reflect the need to represent the Institute's worldwide membership.

2. CVs of the 2013 Presidential candidates

http://www.ciarb.org/news/ciarb-news/presidential-nominees-cvs-1.php

3. Biographies of the current CIArb President and Deputy President
http://www.ciarb.org/about/whos-who/patron-presidents-and-companions/presidents-biographies/#000320

CIArb is currently seeking to recruit two additional members to serve on the PCC and applications are therefore invited from amongst Fellows of the Institute.

The function of the PCC is to investigate any allegation of misconduct against a member of the Institute. Misconduct is defined in Bye-law 15.2.

In accordance with 2.1 of the Schedule to the Bye-laws, members shall be appointed for a term of three years by the Board of Trustees from amongst Fellows of the Institute. Members are reimbursed their expenses of attending Committee meetings (there are currently four regular meetings a year). In addition to attending meetings members are assigned to investigate an allegation which involves preparing a written report for the PCC. Generally an individual member undertakes approximately three investigations each year.

Interested applicants should send a covering letter together with CV to Sandra Greenaway, Secretary to the Professional Conduct Committee at the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, 12 Bloomsbury Square London WC1A 2LP or email sgreenaway@ciarb.org

The closing date for applications is Wednesday 31 October 2012.

Americas - 1 vacancy
Ireland - 1 vacancy
United Kingdom - 2 vacancies

Due to the recent change to the Bye-laws, this is our first official election conducted via email. Members in the regions above should have received voting papers via email (those with invalid or no email addresses have been sent the voting papers by post) from the Electoral Reform Services (ERS) - onlinevoting@electoralreform.co.uk. Please ensure that the filters on your email account have not blocked correspondence from ERS. If for any reason you have not received the email from ERS, please first check your spam folder and then contact Naoimh McNamee (Governance Secretary) at NMcNamee@ciarb.org to arrange for the email to be resent.

We hope to see a high voter turnout, in order for this election to be an accurate reflection of the will of our membership, and so we encourage you all to cast your vote before the deadline on Monday 29 October.17:00 hrs. British Summer Time (BST).

Elections will take place in the following regions:

Americas - 1 vacancy
Ireland - 1 vacancy
Great Britain - 2 vacancies

Members in these regions will receive voting papers via email (those with invalid or no email addresses will be sent the voting papers by post) on 24 September from the Electoral Reform Services (ERS) - . Please ensure that the filters on onlinevoting@electoralreform.co.uk. ensure that the filters on your email account do not block correspondence from ERS. If for any reason you do not receive this email, please first check your spam folder and then contact Naoimh McNamee (Governance Secretary) at NMcNamee@ciarb.org to arrange for the email to be resent.

We hope to see a high voter turnout, in order for this election to be an accurate reflection of the will of our membership, and so we encourage you all to cast your vote before the deadline of 5pm on Monday, 29 October.

The UK South Wales Branch has recently had a committee re-shuffle seeing Peter Gracia, becoming Branch Chair, Derek Griffiths adopting the role of Vice Chairman and Dennis Baldwin becoming Branch Treasurer. The branch is planning a number of free CPD events for members later in the year and are requesting that members should update their profiles on the Institute web-site to facilitate ease of contact. Branch members are welcomed to suggest any topics for CPD events in and around Wales and their views are welcomed.

New Branch Website

A Branch website is currently being developed with the assistance of the Institute and any future events and articles will be available there. Branch committee members Mair Coombes-Davies and Robert Shawyer are also closely involved with the University of Glamorgan's efforts to strengthen its Masters provision in law and technology and the Branch is in discussion with Cardiff Law School with a view to providing a prize for outstanding papers in the field of dispute resolution. The branch would also recommend that parties attempt ADR or Dispute Review Boards before deciding to jump off any bridges!

Branch members wishing to contact the Chairman are invited to do so on info@graciaconsult.com

The Approved Faculty List (AFL) provides formal recognition to CIArb members who want to participate in our courses. A faculty member performs a paid role and works with CIArb in accordance with our Faculty Regulations to deliver the modules and associated assessments.

As a faculty member you can take on the role of a tutor, examiner, moderator, course director (non -UK Branches only) and/or assessor. You must go through stringent quality assurance processes to be approved and be entered onto the AFL for a specific role and module. Visit our Education and Training area to download a form or contact us for more information.

We hope you will join our faculty and aid us in continuing to promote and educate on the settlement of disputes through methods of alternative dispute resolution.