Zoom Logo

Pre-Moot 11 Live Opening Ceremony & Arbitrator Roundtable - Shared screen with speaker view
Ehsan Ahmed
26:39
can we play the CISG song after this ?
AUAF-Shakira Yazdani
27:21
I was sad we won't have the CISG song
Ronald Brand
28:52
It's available at cisgsong.com (with footnotes)
Asim Shahada
56:28
Many thanks Ronald
Hafaitha, Nadine Mowafq Fares
56:43
Reach out to Professor Brand at rbrand@pitt.edu!
Rodrigo Quintero Bencomo
01:02:58
And it's a pretty good website!
Ronald Brand
01:04:40
For the Pitt Law LLM scholarship ($15,000), my email address is rbrand@pitt.edu. Send me an email by next Saturday, and I'll confirm that we have the scholarship waiting for you. Best wishes for a great pre-moot!
Zamira Hussaini
01:05:52
Thanks a lot professor Brand. that is a great opportunity for all of us. really appreciate your help and support.
Mais Abbas Abousy
01:10:42
CISG song is on the site … check out the materials for students
Mais Abbas Abousy
01:11:09
Check out the site to see the entire list of participating teams
Mais Abbas Abousy
01:11:59
scholarship is $15,000 contact Professor Brand at rbrand@pitt.edu
Asim Shahada
01:15:33
Question: the standby arbitrators are they will be in as listeners?
Mais Abbas Abousy
01:16:40
Standby arbitrators are not listeners. They are on standby in case we need to fill a missing panel. We will have a WhatsApp group of "Standby Arbitrators" and provide notifications of openings.
Mais Abbas Abousy
01:18:15
you will not have to manually type anything. All are scrolling and uploaded
Rodrigo Quintero Bencomo
01:25:43
Will arbitrators be able to ask questions in any time to both claimant's and respondent's counsel on key subjects?
Ronald Brand
01:26:05
yes
Mais Abbas Abousy
01:26:50
Arbitrators: Check out a video under "Materials for Arbitrators" - where Professor Brand and I give you a good overview of the session procedures :)
Rodrigo Quintero Bencomo
01:27:15
Thank you both.
Vivien ODUAH
01:28:25
Who is the chair of my Tribunal- thanks
Ehsan Ahmed
01:28:49
I seem to recall that all team memos were made available online prior to the oral rounds during my year as a mootie. will this year's memos be available as well ?
Mais Abbas Abousy
01:29:07
Arbitrators pick among themselves who will Chair to panel
Reda Lafrouji
01:29:51
then arbitrators will have to meet up in order to discuss these issues before the hearing
Mais Abbas Abousy
01:30:07
Memos will not likely be available
Vivien ODUAH
01:30:10
Thank you Mais, would we have the opportunity to do that prior to presentation by the participators
Mais Abbas Abousy
01:31:09
Arbitrators in each confirmed panel will be placed in a WhatsApp group prior to their session. Arbitrators have the option to pick who chairs the session via the WhatsApp Group or at the beginning of the session.
Mais Abbas Abousy
01:31:39
We ask that everyone also join 15 minutes prior to their session so that they are able to clear any of these issues and to confirm connectivity
Vivien ODUAH
01:31:41
Great thanks Mais for clarifying
Reda Lafrouji
01:31:50
Great. thank you Mais!
Philip Ray
01:32:19
Order of pleading experienced in practice rounds is (1) Procedure: R first followed by C; and (2) Substance: C first, followed by R. Does Maria‘s presentation advise the reverse order:(1) Substance first, and (2) Procedure 2nd?
Mais Abbas Abousy
01:33:32
I leave this to the capable hands of Mr. Robbie
Robert Cimmino
01:33:58
In general, as Professor Brand mentioned, procedure will go first in the oral pleadings followed by merits.
Robert Cimmino
01:34:39
The panel began with merits because it’s the heart of the problem and because the procedural issues are related to the merits
Mais Abbas Abousy
01:35:04
Thank you Robert
Robert Cimmino
01:35:28
Remember, arbitrators may request to change the order in any way they see fit! Your team should be prepared just in case
Rodrigo Quintero Bencomo
01:41:13
The issue is extremely topical. Article 42 CISG might raise a voluminous number of questions to both the claimant and the defendant, and pre-merit issues as well.
Galatasaray University Vis Moot Team
01:45:45
Will non-oralist team members be also permitted to join the zoom during pleadings?
Mais Abbas Abousy
01:46:36
Only the team and arbitrators be in the session. We allow one coach / faculty to join. NO OTHER PARTIES should be in the room.
Mais Abbas Abousy
01:46:56
The Final Round will be OPEN to all and recorded.
Mais Abbas Abousy
01:47:34
This is to protect the bandwidth and to avoid conflict of interest issues.
Robert Cimmino
01:48:03
You can find more info in the ePre-Moot rules on the BCDR website http://premoot.bcdr-aaa.org/
Rodrigo Quintero Bencomo
01:48:37
Theory of knowledge, reception, in the light of contractual law theory, might suggest an answer to that question about corporation's knowledge.
farwa yasmeen
01:51:59
Can a person pleading the procedure can answer the questions related to substance and vice versa during session?
Mais Abbas Abousy
01:53:43
They should be able to provide a preliminary answer and than likely defer to their colleagues. BUT they should know the basics for all arguments.
farwa yasmeen
01:54:51
ok Thank You Mais
Robert Cimmino
01:54:53
I agree with Mais. In this year’s problem the first and fourth issues and tied together in many ways. You should focus as much as possible on your submission but be able to field relevant questions when necessary
Philip Ray
01:59:20
For joinder and remote examination issue under Swiss Rules how helpful is Smahi, „Due Process under Swiss Rules of International Arbitration“ on SCAI Website under Publications?
Philip Ray
01:59:38
But Tribunal has not consulted with Ross Pharma because Ross does not agree. Does that mean Tribunal does not have jurisdiction under Swiss Rule 4(2)?
Philip Ray
02:03:04
How persuasive is 2020 IBA Rules of Evidence, §8.2 Remote Hearing Protocol, for Tribunal to rule in favor of remote examination of witnesses or experts?
Liz Taylor
02:05:17
Hi Philip - the DUe Process under SCAI website may have some guidance, but does not speak directly to the remote hearing issue. I think the jurisdiction issue of 4(2) is something the pleaders should be prepared to address. For Respondent, they will presumably argue that they "consulted" with Ross by asking them whether they consented to be joined, while Claimant will likely argue that is not sufficient.
Zamira Hussaini
02:06:37
how to prove that Respondent No 2 voluntary joined as there is no evidence in the record? because there might be a question that when Respondent No 2 could joined, why not Ross Pharma
Liz Taylor
02:06:43
Pleaders may be able to effectively cite to IBA rule 8.2 or the new ICC rules (or any other newer guidance on this issue) as persuasive or instructive authority, and should be prepared to answer questions from the panel re: same
Liz Taylor
02:08:11
I believe R2 consents to joinder by being included in the response to notice of arbitration
Zamira Hussaini
02:08:30
also, by consulting the Swiss Rules mean to only take the opinions of the parties and then make the decision the way the tribunal deems necessary or it means to have the consent of the parties?
Nilofar Jamal
02:08:35
Ross Pharma by selecting Swiss Rules in Ross agreement, agreed on the possibility of joinder. which means it's implicit agreement. But now it reject its joinder. So which of them should be given the value?
Fadak Nsaif
02:08:58
prof. I had participated in Hannover pre- moot and one of the arbitrator give the consent issue the importance and he ask me so much about it and another arbitrator told me that I don't have to talk about the consent at all because it's better to prove that Ross should join under the circumstance ?Now I feel lost! shall I talk about the consent less than circumstances or never argue it at all ??
Liz Taylor
02:09:35
these are all the great questions to ask the pleaders, there's always two sides to these issues.
Robert Cimmino
02:10:07
@Zamira, if you look at pg 28 of the file you will see that Respondent 2 “refrains from contesting the jurisdiction of the arbitration tribunal”
Ronald Brand
02:10:45
To Fadak: Consent is fundamental to any arbitration and must be considered. The question here becomes: "what did each party signing each contract consent to?"
Liz Taylor
02:11:16
@Fadak there is no right answer there. You should be prepared to argue your best argument, but if the panel or an arbitrator would prefer to hear one argument over another argument, then you should be as flexible as possible to makes sure you answer the arbitrators questions
Robert Cimmino
02:11:43
@Fadak, consent is key to any arbitration and as the Swiss rules mention the tribunal must consider all relevant circumstances. It’s important to address them together.
Fadak Nsaif
02:12:13
Ok thank you so much \
Robert Cimmino
02:12:43
EVERYONE - an important thing to remember is that you will have many different opinions and questions from different arbitrators. You need to take into consideration all feedback you receive but always make sure YOU are making YOUR best argument
Zamira Hussaini
02:13:05
thanks @Cimmino
Zamira Hussaini
02:13:30
sure
Nilofar Jamal
02:13:32
Ross Pharma by selecting Swiss Rules in Ross agreement, agreed on the possibility of joinder. which means it's implicit agreement. But now it reject its joinder. So which of them should be given the value?
Rodrigo Quintero Bencomo
02:14:27
The scope of the word "place" in Article 25 (1) of Swiss Rules can be disputed, should the remoteness of the arbitration proceedings be contested by any parties?
Liz Taylor
02:14:33
@Nilofar - Ross agreed that a "third-party" could be joined to ITS proceeding, but did they also agree that THEY could be joined to another dispute? I think that's the important question when we talk about implicit consent.
Ehsan Ahmed
02:14:45
I'm fairly certain we will be hearing the arguement that teh word "place" can and maybe interpreted as the "Platform" using which the arbitration is conducted.
Robert Cimmino
02:15:32
@Nilofar - remember to consider that choosing the Swiss rules is an implicit agreement to grant the tribunal the POWER to order joinder, however it doesn’t necessarily mean that choosing Swiss rules means agreement to any dispute of any party. Further, as Liz points out, did Ross agree to be joined or only agree to request joinder of third parties?
Rodrigo Quintero Bencomo
02:16:42
That's also an issue: should there be a debate on the scope of the word "place", in the light of the current pandemic situation, wouldn't that jeopardize the cost-effectiveness of the arbitral procedure?
Nilofar Jamal
02:16:50
@cimmino and Taylor
Nilofar Jamal
02:17:18
thank you so much. I will consider this while arguing 🙂
Ahmed Beya
02:22:15
regarding the pleadings: Is it allowed to record them?
Mais Abbas Abousy
02:22:40
Only Final Round will be recorded.
Ahmed Beya
02:23:04
Ok. Thank you.
Philip Ray
02:23:41
Remote examination issue raises issue of parties‘ intention. Should counsel argue CISG Art. 8
Khaoula Daoud - Université de Carthage
02:24:49
Is it best-suited: to tackle "power" rather than "jurisdiction" in the joinder issue?
Philip Ray
02:25:32
Or should counsel argue party intention is governed by UPICC Art 4 as governing contract law?
Ehsan Ahmed
02:25:49
a save chat option is avialable as well for anyone who wants to save the chat
Rodrigo Quintero Bencomo
02:26:04
I actually saved the chat. Can be saved!
Isra Alaradi
02:27:07
How to save chat ^
farwa yasmeen
02:27:53
Thank You guyz
Jasmine Dallaq
02:28:08
Thank you so much !
Ehsan Ahmed
02:28:13
Dear All, find above the group chat available for download
Rashid AR Ebrahim
02:28:39
thanks to all round table participants
Mais Abbas Abousy
02:28:58
Arbitrators please wait for one more piece of important information
Rodrigo Quintero Bencomo
02:29:07
I have a question on arbitrator's evaluation: how free actually is the arbitrator's criteria?
Mais Abbas Abousy
02:29:08
Apologies we are a bit over time
Steve Gardner
02:29:22
Terrific session today! Thanks to all for your inputs!
Philip Ray
02:30:38
Arbitrator Roundtable is a law professor „issue spotting“ paradise🙏
Rodrigo Quintero Bencomo
02:31:14
By the way, thank you very much to the professions. It was very illustrating and raised a lot of questions. To response those questions and issues will be indeed a challenge to both participants and arbitrators.
Rowan Hamza
02:31:15
Thank you Mais, this would be very helpful.
Kandula Udawatta
02:31:30
Thank you!
Galatasaray University Vis Moot Team
02:32:10
sorry, where is the checklist?
Fadak Nsaif
02:33:08
Thank you so much!
Rodrigo Quintero Bencomo
02:33:55
Greetings from Venezuela! The best of luck to every team, and thank you for such an honor!
Asim Shahada
02:34:34
Many thanks Mais and all.. Good luck to all.
Malaika Moiz
02:35:58
thank you all for this amazing session and good luck to all- from Pakistan
Farahnaz Roman
02:36:57
Thank you everyone, it was amazing session just like the previous years :))
sahar ben amor
02:37:38
thank you so much
John McGowan
02:40:59
Great session and round table! Thank you.
Zamira Hussaini
02:41:21
thanks for the nice words. they are really encouraging.
Dr , Raed Alnimer
02:41:41
Thank you so much
Prof. Zlatan Meskic
02:46:58
thank you Prof. Flechtner for sharing this with us when we are prevented from meeting. Feels like Vienna!!
Rodrigo Quintero Bencomo
02:47:01
That was a masterpiece.
Philip Ray
02:47:09
👍Harry
Mousa Said
02:47:14
thank you
Catharine Nascimento
02:47:18
thank you for this event!
Elizabet Kakabadze
02:47:26
Thank you so much
Emna Ben mansour
02:47:28
thank you !!
Solomon Ezike
02:47:35
Thank you
Esraa Adel
02:47:40
Thank you and good luck for everybody!!