News 24 Jun. 2021
Curtis successfully defends foreign states' procedural privileges in the UK Supreme Court
more
News 23 Jun. 2021
Ibrahim Elsadig joins Curtis as Partner in Dubai
Client Alert 24 Feb. 2022
EU, UK, Japan and Australia Impose Sanctions on Russia
News 09 Aug. 2021
Curtis, Mallet-Prevost, Colt & Mosle enters into association with Chevalier Law in Singapore.
Client Alert 23 May. 2022
U.S. President Biden Issues Seventh Tranche of Economic Sanctions
News 06 May. 2022
Curtis Advises Terna Group on the Sale of its Latin America Power Transmission Assets to CDPQ
Event 24 May. 2022
Claudia Frutos-Peterson to Moderate Panel at Latin Lawyer and GAR Live: Arbitration Summit 2022
Event 26 Apr. 2022
Claudia Frutos-Peterson Speaks at CAI Costa Rica’s 13th Congress of International Arbitration
Event 23 May. 2022
Marco Blanco & Olga Beloded Taught 3-Day LLM Course on International Taxation, Hosted by the DIFC and University of Paris II - Assas
Partner Antonia Birt to Speak at Equal Representation in Arbitration Event Entitled "Diversity and Inclusion, Arbitral Institutions, and Users"
News 24 May. 2022
Curtis Sponsors New ASIL Prize for Best Article in International Dispute Resolution
Client Alert 21 Apr. 2022
New Laws Targeting Assets of Russian Oligarchs: The U.S. Announces Task Force KleptoCapture and the Kleptocracy Asset Recovery Rewards Program
Client Alert 24 Jun. 2021
Update on Virtual Notarization (Executive Order 202.7) During the COVID-19 (Coronavirus) Pandemic (Updated: June 24, 2021) — U.S. Insight
Update on Virtual Witnessing (New York Executive Order 202.14) During The COVID-19 (Coronavirus) Pandemic (Updated: June 24, 2021) — U.S. Insight
Article 05 Feb. 2020
Arbitration.ru
“OPPORTUNITY IS A COMBINATION OF CHANCE AND CHOICE”. INTERVIEW WITH PETER М. WOLRICH, PARTNER OF CURTIS, MALLET-PREVOST, COLT & MOSLE LLP, PARIS
By Dmitry Artyukhov, Arbitration.ru Editor-in-chief
Below is an excerpt from the interview with Arbitration.ru. Please refer to the attachment for the complete interview.
Peter M. Wolrich is one of the leading arbitration lawyers in the world. Born in the U.S., he represented numerous European and Asian countries in complex and lengthy investor-states arbitration proceedings. Peter works in Paris, but occasionally visits Russia as well and took part in American Bar Association conference held in Moscow this September. We talk with Peter about his legal career, the Central Asia, complex cases and his philosophy that has driven him through over 40 years of his work in arbitration.
This year you came to Moscow for the ABA conference hosted together with RAA and spoke on a panel on bifurcation in international arbitration. Why did you choose this particular topic?
Bifurcation is an important and multi-faceted issue that needs to be considered when setting up a time and cost efficient arbitral procedure. However, it is a topic that is rarely dealt with in arbitration conferences. I thought it was time to bring it to the fore, and the Moscow ABA/RАA Conference was an excellent venue in which to do so.
In your long career in arbitration, what particular challenges of bifurcation have you come across as a counsel or arbitrator?
Bifurcation, of course, occurs when certain issues are broken out for early determination by the arbitral tribunal in a partial award. Some issues such as jurisdiction, capacity, arbitrability or the application of the statute of limitations could dispose of the entire arbitration. Other issues such as the applicable law, the meaning of a contractual provision or the determination of a key fact in dispute may narrow or simplify the remaining issues to be decided or may encourage settlement. As an example, in one arbitration in which I was sitting as an arbitrator there was an issue as to whether the law of country X or the law of country Y was applicable to the dispute. We considered that it would be inefficient to require the parties to plead their case alternatively under two different legal systems. In addition, the laws of country X allowed for consequential damages and the laws of country Y did not. One of Claimant’s largest claims was for consequential damages. As a result, the tribunal, at the request of Claimant, decided to bifurcate the applicable law issue and decide it upfront in a partial award.
International Arbitration
Commercial Disputes - Arbitration
Peter M. Wolrich
Partner
Paris
+33 1 42 68 72 00
We use cookies on our website to enhance your browsing experience, match your interests and assess our website performance. We do not share information with any third-party for marketing purposes. Please view our privacy policy to learn more about the use of cookies on our website. By continuing to browse our website, you consent to our use of cookies.