International arbitration is a complex and expanding area of the law. Transnational disputes are increasingly common in today's global economy and international arbitration provides a flexible, private and neutral forum for the resolution of such disputes with more facile worldwide enforcement. Whether you are drafting the contract or engaging in a dispute arising therefrom, qualified representation from experienced international arbitration lawyers is critical to the ultimate outcome.
Studies find that most companies pay little, if any, attention to the arbitration clause in contracts, most often simply deferring to boilerplate terms. When a dispute arises, companies frequently engage litigation counsel that lacks a depth of knowledge and experience in international arbitration, leading to adverse results with no available recourse of appeal. Far too often, choices of institutional rules, arbitral seat and procedural law are overlooked, not appreciated or simply ignored. When it comes to enforcing or defending one's rights in arbitration, it is crucial that your counsel is both qualified and experienced in international arbitral practice.
We regularly represent clients in international arbitrations concerning a vast array of commercial disputes, involving highly technical subject matters, in jurisdictions around the world (e.g., Hong Kong, Tokyo, Singapore, London, New York) and under most institutional rules (e.g., UNCITRAL, ICC, HKIAC, ICDR, SIAC, FAA). Our extensive experience both in arbitration and as trial attorneys in some of the most challenging U.S. patent, trade secret and other complex litigation, allows us to provide the highest quality representation at all stages of the arbitral process. Our professional relationships in Japan, Hong Kong, Singapore, United Kingdom and Europe allows us to provide seamless representation across borders even when travel is impractical or impossible.
In addition, we are frequently involved in enforcing international arbitration awards under the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards of 1958 (the “New York Convention”) and, when necessary, in court proceedings seeking or defending against applications to set aside an award and/or resisting the recognition or enforcement of arbitral awards.
We are uniquely positioned for the rapidly growing trend towards virtual hearings. Whereas such virtual practice has remained unusual for international practice, we have extensive experience in conducting remote (virtual) depositions and hearings in complex U.S. litigation matters. Our founding member helped to pioneer the use of electronic document storage and production and electronic evidence display in U.S. litigation. The use of the latest trial presentation technologies further enhances the level of representation we provide to our clients and dovetails perfectly with virtual hearings.
Arbitrator / Mediator / Neutral
In addition to serving as counsel, our founding member is a qualified international arbitrator listed as a panelist on the WIPO List of Neutrals and AIPLA List of Arbitrators and Mediators, a Member (MCIArb) of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators and a Fellow (FBiam) of the Bali International Arbitration and Mediation Center.
We also provide mediation and neutral early evaluation services in intellectual property and life science disputes.
Recent engagements include:
Lead counsel in successful ICC arbitration, seated in Tokyo, under Japanese law on behalf of a Japanese claimant (medical device manufacturer) against an Italian respondent (distributor).
Lead counsel in successful HKIAC arbitration, seated in Hong Kong, under UNCITRAL Rules on behalf of multinational claimants (OEM manufacturer/supplier) against a Chinese respondent (OEM seller).
Lead counsel in ICC arbitration, seated in Tokyo, under Thai law on behalf of Japanese/Thai claimants (EPC contractors) against Japanese/Thai respondents (chemical plant owners); settled on favorable terms for client.
Lead counsel in successful ICC arbitration, seated in Singapore, under English law on behalf of Japanese/Malaysian claimants (EPC contractors) against Japanese/Malaysian respondents (chemical plant owners); client awarded ~US$50 million.