Find an Arbitrator

The Launch of the 2021 ICC Rules of Arbitration

by Michael Bühler, Charles C. Adams, Charles Kaplan, Nicole Dolenz, Tunde Oyewole

December 2020

This article first appeared on Orrick.com, here.

On 1 January 2021, nine years after the last major overhaul of the ICC Rules of Arbitration and less than four years after a very limited revision of these Rules in 2017, a new version of the ICC Rules of Arbitration will come into force. While the 2021 ICC Rules contain a rather limited number of changes compared to the 2012 and 2017 predecessor versions, some of those changes are particularly significant. The 2021 ICC Rules will apply to all new ICC cases commenced as of 1 January 2021, regardless of the date of the arbitration agreement under which the arbitration is brought.

The 2021 ICC Rules were officially launched on 1 December 2020. Although the ICC Court of Arbitration is headquartered in Paris as part of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), it acts as a global institution nowadays with offices in Hong Kong, New York, São Paulo, Singapore, and Abu Dhabi. By periodically revising its Rules of Arbitration, The ICC Court can best ensure that it will remain the leading institution for dispute resolution the world over. As of July 2021, the ICC Court will be presided by an American lawyer, since Claudia Salomon, a current vice-president of the ICC Court, has been designated as the ICC Court’s next president, the first woman ever to serve in that function.

The outgoing president of the ICC Court, Alexis Mourre from France, has described the amendments to the 2021 ICC Rules as “a further step towards greater efficiency, flexibility, and transparency of the Rules, making ICC Arbitration even more attractive, both for large, complex arbitrations and for smaller cases.” Indeed, these worthy objectives account for many of the welcome small revisions that incorporate existing practices proven to be efficient (such as, amendments that prioritize electronic submissions and recognize the utility of remote hearings). The ICC’s objectives are also exemplified by six notable changes contained in the new Rules, which we discuss in the article linked below.

To read the full article, click here.

 

Michael Bühler

 

Michael Bühler, with over 30 years of experience as a practicing lawyer, focuses on international dispute resolution in complex arbitrations. He has represented major corporations, state-owned entities, and governments in more than 200 arbitrations and has acted as chairman, sole arbitrator, and party-appointed arbitrator in more than 60 arbitrations worldwide.

 

Michael assists clients in pre-litigation situations, helping them to develop a true defense strategy, which often leads to early dispute settlements. He acts regularly as lead counsel in arbitrations under the ICC Rules and those of the arbitration associations of Germany, Belgium, Sweden, Austria, Switzerland, and the United States and under the UNCITRAL Rules, ICSID, WIPO (Geneva), and the Court of Arbitration for Sport (Lausanne). He conducts arbitrations throughout Europe, North America, the Middle East, and the Asia-Pacific region in the following fields: civil construction, engineering, supply of industrial equipment, and industrial or power plants (often involving the application of the FIDIC Conditions of Contract, in common, civil, and Islamic law); oil and gas projects; hotel development projects and hotel management contracts; and distribution and license agreements in various sectors, including the chemical, pharmaceutical, food, liquor, and luxury goods industries.

 

Michael started his career as a counsel at the ICC International Court of Arbitration, of which he was the German member (1997-2009). He was co-chair of the Task Force of the ICC Commission on Arbitration on the Revision of the ICC Arbitration Rules (2008-2011) (which led to the adoption of the 2012 ICC Rules of Arbitration, which to date remain the state-of-the-art arbitration rules), and is a member of the ICC Commission on International Arbitration and the IBA, as well as numerous arbitral institutions such as CEPANI, DIS, ASA and DIAC and has been appointed to the Panel of Arbitrators for Singapore International Arbitration Centre, the Korean Commercial Arbitration Board, the Vienna International Arbitration Centre and the Kuala Lumpur Regional Centre for Arbitration.


 

Charles C. Adams, Jr., is the former Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States to the Republic of Finland (2015-2017) and Global Co-Head of Orrick's International Arbitration Practice Group based in Geneva.

 

Charles' experience spans four decades at the highest levels of international dispute resolution, in more than 300 international arbitration proceedings as counsel and chairman or party-arbitrator in arbitral fora all over the world.

 

Charles also has 10 years’ membership on the Board of Trustees of the Dubai International Arbitration Centre (DIAC).


Charles Kaplan is a highly specialized arbitration lawyer based in Orrick’s Paris office. He has conducted arbitrations on EPC Contracts, oil production sharing agreements, gas pricing disputes, tax stabilization agreements, international joint ventures, as well as aircraft development programs, in France and elsewhere.

 

Highly regarded in the international arbitration market, Charles is consistently recognized as a key practitioner particularly in Europe, Africa, and the Middle East. According to Chambers & Partners, clients describe him as an “extremely bright” expert on cross-border matters and praise his “commercial insight and dedication.” Ranked among Chambers France’s top International Arbitration lawyers, Charles is said to be “a very good lawyer whose experience in international arbitration is superb.”

 

In particular, Charles advises French and international energy majors, and industrials. He has extensive experience of arbitration under ICC, ICSID, French Arbitration Association, LCIA, and Milan Chamber rules. He regularly sits as an arbitrator.

 

He originally qualified as an English barrister and then as a French avocat. In addition to investment disputes, he has handled civil as well as common law disputes in a number of jurisdictions in Europe, Africa, the Middle East and Asia.

 

Before he joined Orrick, he was co-head of Herbert Smith Freehills LLP's Global Arbitration practice and led the Paris Arbitration group.


 

Nicole Dolenz is a dual-trained, multilingual, international commercial, and investment arbitration authority representing multinational clients around the world. Nicole has outstanding knowledge in foreign investment disputes involving states and the energy, infrastructure, and construction sectors.

 

Nicole has more than 20 years’ experience representing clients in international arbitration, having practiced in one of the biggest law firms in the world in New York for six years, an Austrian firm in Vienna for five years, and a major U.S. firm in Paris for seven years, before joining Orrick. Dual trained in both civil and common law jurisdictions, Nicole has conducted arbitrations under all the main international arbitration rules including the ICC, AAA, SCC, UNCITRAL, ICDR, and ICSID as well as local European arbitration institutions such as the Vienna Chamber (VIAC), CEPANI, Swiss Chamber and DIS. Her cases have spanned a variety of industries including oil and gas, nuclear energy, aviation, construction, food and beverages, transportation, and insurance. Most recently Nicole has worked on multi-billion dollar gas price review arbitrations for a major European producer and several construction arbitrations, including a US$8 billion ICC arbitration for the world’s largest shipbuilder. She is frequently nominated to act as arbitrator and speaks and publishes regularly on questions of international commercial and investment arbitration, notably, The International Comparative Legal Guide to: Investor-State Arbitration 2019 – Country Questions and Answers: France. Nicole is a former member of the Executive Board and Global Boards of ICDR Y&I and practices in English, German French and has a working knowledge of Spanish and Portuguese.


 

Tunde Oyewole is a Litigation and International Arbitration lawyer in Orrick's Paris office. He has represented investors, developers, States and energy companies in arbitrations under the ICC, SCC, CRCICA, LCIA, ICSID, and UNCITRAL rules of arbitration.

 

His extensive international experience includes disputes involving countries in the Americas (Brazil, Chile, Peru, Venezuela, and Canada), the Middle East and North Africa (U.A.E., Bahrain, Egypt, Israel, Kuwait, Algeria, and Morocco), Asia (China, India, and Japan), and Europe (France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Spain, Sweden, and Ukraine).

 

He has handled post-M&A disputes, corporate shareholder disputes, foreign investment disputes, and intellectual property disputes in a number of sectors (engineering and construction, power and energy, mining, cement, real estate, and insurance).

 

Tunde is a Member of the New York Bar and passed the Paris Bar Exam in March 2014 (Article 100). Before joining Orrick, he practiced as an associate with Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer in Paris, where he worked closely with Jan Paulsson and Georgios Petrochilos on their forthcoming book on the 2011 UNCITRAL rules of arbitration.

The views expressed by authors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Resourceful Internet Solutions, Inc., Arbitrate.com or of reviewing editors.
PREV     NEXT
 

Arbitration News

Bringing a Case to Arbitration Should be Easier Following Recent Ninth Circuit Decision Recently, the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decided that a plaintiff may not avoid arbitration and manufacture appellate jurisdiction simply by vo ...more
Third Circuit Holds That an Arbitration Award Was a Judicial Record and Must Be Unsealed Last month, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held that an arbitration award filed with a petition to confirm the award was a ...more
Second Circuit Declines to Vacate Foreign Arbitral Award Under New York Convention Absent Valid Reason In Pagaduan v. Carnival Corp., the Second Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the Eastern District of New York's order declining Pagaduan's motio ...more
New York City Set To End At-Will Employment For Fast Food Workers On December 17, the New York City Council passed two bills that prohibit fast food employers from terminating employees unless they have just cause or bona fide economic reasons for ...more
Arbitration Provision Survives Agent Termination Has the judicial preference for presuming the survivability of arbitration clauses governing workplace disputes reached canonical status? According to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern Dis ...more
Judge McMahon Rules Outside Counsel’s Pre-Suit Download of Online Dating App Does Not Bind Party to Arbitration Agreement On December 15, 2020, U.S. District Judge Colleen McMahon (S.D.N.Y.) denied plaintiff Perry Street Software, Inc.’s moti ...more
Ninth Circuit Hears Oral Arguments On Employment Arbitration Restrictions The legal battles over Assembly Bill 51 (AB 51), which attempts to prohibit mandatory employment arbitration agreements, continue. The Ninth Circuit heard the much anti ...more