Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T00:39:17.812Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Holding Counsel to Account in International Arbitration

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 May 2011

SAM McMULLAN
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Counsel are regulated the world over in their dealings with a court of law through the enforcement of ethical duties that are owed by them. With the increased prevalence of arbitration in resolving disputes internationally, the question then arises: how are counsel kept in check when appearing before an arbitral tribunal? The issues involved are magnified when one considers the question in the context of international arbitral tribunals. This paper considers these issues by analysing them in three parts. First, is ethical regulation necessary in international arbitration? Second, does an arbitral tribunal have jurisdiction to consider and enforce ethical obligations owed to it by counsel? Third, what ethical obligations should be applied to counsel?

Keywords

arbitrators' inherent jurisdictionethicsinternational arbitrationobligations of counselsanctions
Type
CURRENT LEGAL DEVELOPMENTS
Information
Leiden Journal of International Law , Volume 24 , Issue 2 , June 2011 , pp. 491 - 512
Copyright
Copyright © Foundation of the Leiden Journal of International Law 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 G. C. Hazard, Jr, Ethics in the Practice of Law (1978), 1.

2 A. Redfern and M. Hunter, Law and Practice of International Commercial Arbitration (1999), 358; W. L. Craig, W. W. Park, and J. Paulsson, International Chamber of Commerce Arbitration (2000), 277.

3 C. Rogers, ‘Fit and Function in Legal Ethics: Developing a Code of Conduct for International Arbitration’, (2001–02) 23 Mich. JIL 341, at 355; D. F. Vagts, ‘The International Legal Profession: A Need for More Governance?’, (1996) 90 AJIL 250, at 250; see generally Y. Dezalay and B. G. Garth, Dealing in Virtue: International Commercial Arbitration and the Construction of a Transnational Legal Order (1996).

4 See generally C. A. Rogers, ‘Context and Institutional Structure in Attorney Regulation: Constructing an Enforcement Regime for International Arbitration’, (2003) 39 Stanford JIL 1; C. Benson, ‘Can Professional Ethics Wait? The Need for Transparency in International Arbitration’, (2009) 3(1) DRI 78; cf. A. Boldizar and O. Korhonen, ‘Ethics, Morals and International Law’, (1999) 10(2) EJIL 279, at 287; Arthurs, H. W., ‘A Global Code of Legal Ethics for the Transnational Legal Field’, (1999) 2 Legal Ethics 59CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5 E.g., the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce, which ceased its ethics project because it encountered so many problems: Rogers, supra note 3, at note 268, although several proposals for such a code have been circulated recently – one at the ICCA Congress in Rio de Janeiro and another by the ILA Study Group on the Practice and Procedure of International Courts and Tribunals.

6 Completed on 27 September 2010, available at www.ila-hq.org.

7 See, e.g., the Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe's (CCBE) Charter of Core Principles of the European Legal Profession and Code of Conduct for European Lawyers, which was six years in the making: Terry, L. S., ‘An Introduction to the European Community's Legal Ethics Code Part I: An Analysis of the CCBE Code of Conduct’, (1993) 7 Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics 1Google Scholar.

8 Thomas, P. C., ‘Disqualifying Lawyers in Arbitrations: Do the Arbitrators Play any Proper Role’, (1990) 1 American Review of International Arbitration 562, at 562Google Scholar; Rogers, supra note 4, at 17.

9 G. B. Born, International Commercial Arbitration (2009), 2304.

10 See generally Rogers, supra note 3; M. C. Daly, ‘The Dichotomy between Standards and Rules: A New Way of Understanding the Differences in Perceptions of Lawyer Codes of Conduct by US and Foreign Lawyers’, (1999) 32 Vand. JTL 1118.

11 See generally Rogers, supra note 3; Zacharias, F. C., ‘Fact and Fiction in the Restatement of the Law Governing Lawyers: Should the Confidentiality Provisions Restate the Law?’, (1993) 6 Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics 903Google Scholar; T. Dare, ‘Virtue Ethics and Legal Ethics’, (1998) 28 VUWLR 141; cf. K. Weisenberger, ‘Peace Is Not the Absence of Conflict: A Response to Professor Roger's Article “Fit and Function in Legal Ethics”’, (2007) 25 Wisc. ILJ 89, at 107; Terry, supra note 7, at 53.

12 C. J. Whelan, ‘Ethics Beyond the Horizon: Why Regulate the Practice of Law’, (2001) 34 Vand. JTL 931, at 940; see generally P. S. Anderson, ‘Remarks of Philip S Anderson’, (1999–2000) 18 Dick JIL 43.

13 Charter of Core Principles of the European Legal Profession and Code of Conduct for European Lawyers (2008) (CCBE Code).

14 Terry, supra note 7, at 52.

15 See Bremer Vulkan Schiffbau und Maschinenfabrik v. South India Shipping Corporation Ltd, [1981] 2 WLR 141 (HL), per Lord Diplock.

16 J. Jakubowski, ‘Reflections on the Philosophy of International Commercial Arbitration and Conciliation’, in J. C. Schultsz and A. J. Van Den Berg (eds.), The Art of Arbitration: Essays on International Arbitration Liber Amicorum Pieter Sanders 12 September 1912–1982 (1982), 175, at 178.

17 C. M. Schmitthoff, ‘The Jurisdiction of the Arbitrator’, in Schultsz and Van Den Berg supra note 16, at 285; E. Gaillard and J. Savage (eds.), Fouchard Gaillard Goldman on International Commercial Arbitration (1999), 11; see also Jakubowski, supra note 16 at 182.

18 McConnaughay, P. J., ‘The Risks and Virtues of Lawlessness: A “Second Look” at International Commercial Arbitration’, (1998–99) 93 Northwestern University Law Review 453, at 500Google Scholar; Straub, M., ‘Resisting Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards’, (1990) 68 Texas Law Review 1031, at 1036Google Scholar; Park, W. W., ‘National Law and Commercial Justice: Safeguarding Procedural Integrity in International Arbitration’, (1989) 63 Tulane Law Review 647, at 701Google Scholar; L. W. Craig, ‘Some Trends and Developments in the Laws and Practice of International Commercial Arbitration’, (1995) 30 Texas ILJ 1, at 8.

19 The goal of party autonomy is fervently upheld in ICC Case No. 1512 (Preliminary Award), (1971) 1 Yearbook: Commercial Arbitration 128, at 128–9.

20 J.-F. Poudret and S. Besson, Comparative Law of International Arbitration (2007), 11.

21 Ibid.

22 Ninety per cent on the count of Guzman, A. T., ‘Arbitrator Liability: Reconciling Arbitration and Mandatory Rules’, (1999–2000) 49 Duke Law Journal 1279, at 1280CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

23 Rogers, supra note 3, at 352; Brunet, E., ‘Replacing the Folklore Arbitration with a Contract Model of Arbitration’, (1999) 74 Tulane Law Review 39, at 62Google Scholar; cf. Stipanowich, T. J., ‘Future Lies Down a Number of Divergent Paths’, (2000) 3 Dispute Resolution Magazine 16Google Scholar.

24 T. E. Carbonneau, ‘Rendering Arbitral Awards with Reasons: The Elaboration of a Common Law of International Transactions’, (1985) 23 Col. JTL 579, at 580; Rogers, supra note 3, at 354.

25 C. Menkel-Meadow, ‘Are Cross-Cultural Ethics Standards Possible or Desirable in International Arbitration?’, in P. Gauch, F. Werro, and P. Pichonnaz (eds.), Melanges en l'honneur de Pierre Tercier (2008), 882, at 886.

26 Rogers, supra note 4, at 1; cf. J. Paulsson, ‘Arbitration Unbound: Award Detached from the Law of Its Country of Origin’, (1981) 30 ICLQ 385, at 385.

27 See, e.g., the Arbitration between the Government of the Sudan and the Sudan People's Liberation Movement/Army on Delimiting the Abyei Area (Final Award), available at www.pca-cpa.org.

28 See Mitsubishi v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth Inc., (1985) 473 US 614; E. A. Posner, ‘Arbitration and the Harmonization of International Commercial Law: A Defence of Mitsubishi’, (1998–99) 39 Vand. JIL 647; see also R. P. Alford, ‘Arbitrating Human Rights’, (2005) ASIL Proc. 233; see also Jean Estate v. Wires Jolley LLP, [2009] ONCA 339.

29 International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) Convention (18 March 1965), 575 UNTS 159.

30 Art. 54.

31 United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (10 June 1958), 330 UNTS 38 (New York Convention).

32 Status of the 1958 Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, available at www.uncitral.org.

33 Art. V(2)(b); see M. S. Kurkela and H. Snellman, Due Process in International Commercial Arbitration (2005), 9; see generally Van Houtte, H., ‘Counsel–Witness Relations and Professional Misconduct in Civil Law Systems’, (2003) 14 (4)Arbitration International 457CrossRefGoogle Scholar; cf. Rogers, supra note 4, at note 167.

34 Parsons & Whittemore Overseas Co. v. Société Générale de l'Industrie du Papier (RAKTA), (1974) 508 F2d 969 (2d Cir); Fotochrome Inc. v. Copal Co., (1975) 517 F2d 512 (2d Cir); Gaillard and Savage, supra note 17, at 997; P. Sanders, ‘Twenty Years’ Review of the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards', (1979) 13 International Law 269, at 272; see also International Law Association, Resolution on Public Policy as a Bar to Enforcement of International Arbitration Awards (6 April 2002), available at www.ila-hq.org, Recommendation 1.

35 Gaillard and Savage, supra note 17, at 996; International Law Association, supra note 34, Recommendation 1(b); cf. Rogers, supra note 4, at 48; cf. the conflict-of-laws approach of Professor Born in Born, supra note 9, at 2488.

36 A. Barraclough and J. Waincymer, ‘Mandatory Rules of Law in International Commercial Arbitration’, (2005) 6 Melb. JIL 205, at 218.

37 Sanders, supra note 34, at 271; A. J. van den Berg, ‘Why Are Some Awards Not Enforceable?’, in A. J. van den Berg (ed.), International Council for Commercial Arbitration Congress Series No. 12: New Horizons in International Commercial Arbitration and Beyond (2005), 291, at 309; see also Richardson v. Mellish, (1824) 2 Bing 299, at 252, per Burrough J.

38 B. Hanotiau and O. Caprasse, ‘Public Policy in International Commercial Arbitration’, in E. Gaillard and D. di Pietro (eds.), Enforcement of Arbitration Agreements and International Arbitral Awards: The New York Convention in Practice (2008), 780, at 819; see Supreme Court of Hong Kong, High Court, 12 August 1992, JJ Agro Industries (P) Ltd v. Texuna International Ltd, XVIII Year Book of Commercial Arbitration 396 (1993), in which the Supreme Court refused to give effect to an award made in a case in which a witness statement had allegedly been obtained through duress from a witness kidnapped by a party to the arbitration; Gaillard and Savage, supra note 17, at 857.

39 Kurkela and Snellman, supra note 33, at 12.

40 See generally R. B. Lillich and C. N. Brower (eds.), International Arbitration in the 21st Century: Towards ‘Judicialization’ and Uniformity (1994); Dezalay and Garth, supra note 3, at 55.

41 Rogers, supra note 3, at 354; ‘Comparative Analysis of International Dispute Resolution Institutions’, (1991) 85 Society of International Law Proceedings 64; the practice is very common under ICSID proceedings: see, e.g., Siemens AG v. Argentine Republic, (Jurisdiction) ICSID Case No. ARB/02/8 (ICSID, 2004, Sureda P, Brower, and Janeiro), in C. McLachlan, L. Shore, and M. Weiniger, International Investment Arbitration (2008).

42 See generally Kauffmann-Kohler, G., ‘Arbitral Precedent: Dream, Necessity of Excuse? The Freshfields Lecture’, (2007) 23 (3)Arbitration International 357CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

43 Pina, O. M., ‘Systems of Ethical Regulation: An International Comparison’, (1987) 1 Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics 797, at 800Google Scholar.

44 See generally Lowenfeld, A. F., ‘Introduction: The Elements of Procedure: Are They Separately Portable?’, (1997) 45 American Journal of Comparative Law 649, at 654CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

45 See Weisenberger, supra note 11, at 89; Majumdar, M., ‘Ethics in the International Arena: The Need for Clarification’, (1994–95) 8 Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics 439Google Scholar; D. Vagts, ‘International Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility’, (1998) 92 ASIL Proc. 378; Vagts, D. F., ‘Professional Responsibility in Transborder Practice: Conflict and Resolution’, (1999–2000) 13 Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics 677, at 677Google Scholar.

46 R. J. Goebel, ‘Lawyers in the European Community: Progress toward Community-Wide Rights of Practice’, in M. C. Daly and R. J. Goebel (eds.), Rights, Liability, and Ethics in International Legal Practice (1995), 239, at 297; Vagts, D. F., ‘Professional Responsibility in Transborder Practice: Conflict and Resolution’, (1999–2000) 13 Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics 677, at 690Google Scholar.

47 See, e.g., Weisenberger, supra note 11.

48 Vagts, supra note 46, at 689.

49 American Bar Association Model Rules of Professional Conduct (2002) (ABA Model Rules).

50 See Terry, L. S., ‘An Introduction to the European Community's Legal Ethics Code. Part II: Applying the CCBE Code of Conduct’, (1993) 7 Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics 345, for an application of this ruleGoogle Scholar.

51 Joy, P. A., ‘The Relationship between Civil Rule 11 and Lawyer Discipline: An Empirical Analysis Suggesting Institutional Choices in Regulation of Lawyers’, (2004) 37 Loyola of Los Angeles Review 765, at 797Google Scholar; see generally S. M. Cone, III, ‘The Common Code of Conduct from an American Perspective’, in Daly and Goebel, supra note 46, at 219.

52 Daly and Goebel, supra note 46, at 296.

53 E.g., those in the USA.

54 Wilkins, D. B., ‘Who Should Regulate Lawyers?’, (1992) 105 Harvard Law Review 801, at 851CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

55 Born, supra note 9, at 2318; Gaillard and Savage, supra note 17, at 635; see also Braes of Doune Wind Farm (Scotland) Limited v. Alfred McAlpine Business Services Limited, [2008] EWHC 426 (TCC).

56 Born, supra note 9, at 2318, referring to procedure around witness preparation where the International Bar Association's Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Commercial Arbitration (1999) now are accepted. See Professor Born's discussion on these issues at 2309–11.

57 Paulsson, J., ‘Standards of Conduct in International Arbitration’, (1992) 3 American Review of International Arbitration 214Google Scholar, at 214.

58 Born, supra note 9, at 2318; ibid., at 214.

59 See generally Kramer, L., ‘The Myth of the “Unprovided-for” Case’, (1989) 75 Vanderbilt Law Review 1045CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

60 Both the ABA Model Rules Rule 1.0(m) and the CCBE Code Rule (4.5) extend their rules to a lawyer's relations with an arbitral tribunal as well as to the courts.

61 CCBE Code, Preamble.

62 Terry, supra note 7, at 1.

63 Cf. J. Toulmin, ‘A Worldwide Common Code of Professional Ethics?’, (1991–92) 15 Fordham ILJ 681.

64 International Bar Association, International Code of Ethics (1988); this code is currently undergoing review.

65 International Bar Association, General Principles for the Legal Profession (2006).

66 International Law Association, Hague Principles on Ethical Standards for Counsel Appearing before International Courts and Tribunals, completed on 27 September 2010, available at www.ila-hq.org.

67 Majumdar, M., ‘Ethics in the International Arena: The Need for Clarification’, (1994–95) 8 Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics 439, at 447Google Scholar.

68 E.g., under the IBA Code Rule 6, a lawyer must ‘never knowingly give to the court incorrect information or advice which is to their knowledge contrary to the law’.

69 Boon, A. and Flood, J., ‘Globalization of Professional Ethics? The Significance of Lawyers' International Codes of Conduct’, (1999) 2 Legal Ethics 29, at 49CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

70 See also Boldizar and Korhonen, supra note 4, at 285, for a discussion on the philosophical underpinnings of the actor/object interaction that can be used to set ethical guidelines. See also Arthurs, supra note 4, at 64.

71 Boon and Flood, supra note 69, at 51; Arthurs, supra note 4, at 68; Terdiman, R., ‘Translator's Introduction to P Bourdieu “The Force of Law: Toward a Sociology of the Juridical Field”’, (1987) 38 Hastings Law Journal 805Google Scholar; Rogers, supra note 3, at 386.

72 Rogers, supra note 3, at 394; see also Frank, L. R., ‘Ethical Responsibilities and the International Lawyer: Mind the Gaps’, (2000) 3 University of Illinois Law Review 957Google Scholar.

73 Rogers, supra note 3, at 390; see generally M. D. Schwartz et al., Problems in Legal Ethics (2003).

74 Rogers, supra note 3, at 389; see generally Merryman, J., ‘Civil Law Tradition’, (1987) 35 (2)American Journal of Comparative Law 438CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

75 General principles common to civilized nations are a source of international law: Art. 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice.

76 H. Mosler, ‘General Principles of Law’, in R. Bernhardt (ed.), Encyclopedia of Public International Law (1995), 511, at 516; C. McLachlan, Lis Pendens in International Litigation (2009), 352.

77 Mosler, ibid., at 517.

78 Ibid., at 518.

79 G. C. Hazard, Jr, and A. Dondi, Legal Ethics: A Comparative Study (2004), 2; Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, s. 4; English Solicitors' Regulation Authority Code of Conduct (2007), Rule 1.01; W. Bradley Wendel, ‘Legal Advising and the Rule of Law’ (2008), unpublished research paper, available at papers.ssrn.com/abstract=1175092; see also Prosecutor v. Duško Tadić, Case No IT-94–1-A-R77, ICTY Appeals Chamber, Judgment on Allegations of Contempt against Prior Counsel, Milan Vujin (31 January 2000); R. A. Brand, ‘Vertical Regulation in a Horizontal World: National Regulation of Global Legal Practice’, Journal of Private International Law Conference 2009, New York University School of Law, 17–18 April 2009, 16.

80 G. Naón, ‘Choice-of-Law Problems in International Commercial Arbitration’, (2001) 289 RdC 159, at 159.

81 Rogers, supra note 3, at 411.

82 Ibid., at 417.

83 See generally Dare, T., ‘Mere-Zeal, Hyper-Zeal and the Ethical Obligations of Lawyers’, (2004) 7 Legal Ethics 24CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

84 See McMunigal, K., ‘Rethinking Attorney Conflict of Interest Doctrine’, (1991–92) 5 Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics 823, at 831Google Scholar.

85 Holland, S. et al. ., ‘Conflicts of Interest: Time for a Change?’, (2000–01) 3 Legal Ethics 132CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 134.

86 Prince Jefri Bolkiah v. KPMG, [1999] 2 AC 222, at 234, (HL) Lord Millett.

87 MacDonal Estate v. Martin, (1991) 77 DLR (4th) 249 (SCC), at [18].

88 Hazard and Dondi, supra note 79, at 158.

89 See, e.g., Russell McVeagh v. Tower Corp, [1998] 3 NZLR 641 (NZCA).

90 Holland et al., supra note 85, at 134; Prince Jefri Bolkiah v. KPMG, [1999] 2 AC 222, at 234, (HL) Lord Millett; Thomas, supra note 8, at 575.

91 Principle 3.

92 M. C. Daly, ‘The Ethical Implications of the Globalization of the Legal Profession: A Challenge to the Teaching of Professional Responsibility in the Twenty-First Century’, (1998) 21 Fordham ILJ 1239, at 1289.

93 Menkel-Meadow, supra note 25, at 903.

94 Ibid.

95 See, e.g., Terry, supra note 50, at 389.

96 Thomas, supra note 8, at 562; Rogers, supra note 4, at 17.

97 O. Chukwumerije, Choice of Law in International Commercial Arbitration (1994), 180; McConnaughay, supra note 18, at 455; see also Mayer, P., ‘Mandatory Rules of Law in International Arbitration’, (1986) 2 Arbitration International 274, at 275CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

98 Barraclough and Waincymer, supra note 36, at 205; Poudret and Besson, supra note 20, at 521; cf. the conflict-of-laws approach in Born, supra note 9, at 2175–7.

99 Rogers, supra note 4, at 16; see generally Guzman, supra note 22, at 1292.

100 Poudret and Besson, supra note 20, at 521; cf. the conflict-of-laws approach in Born, supra note 9, at 2175–7.

101 See Mitsubishi v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth Inc., supra note 28; Posner, supra note 28, at 647; see also the French Court of Appeal decision in International Contractors Group v. X, cited in Paulsson, J., ‘Standards of Conduct in International Arbitration’, (1992) 3 American Review of International Arbitration 214Google Scholar, at 215–17; Jean Estate v. Wires Jolley LLP, supra note 28; A.-G. v. Mobil Oil NZ Ltd, [1989] 2 NZLR 649 (HC).

102 supra note 28, at 360.

103 Ibid.

104 Rogers, supra note 4, at 18.

105 See section 3.1, supra.

106 World Duty Free Company Limited v. Republic of Kenya, ICSID Case No. ARB/00/7 (ICSID, 2000, Guillaume P, Veeder, and Rogers), in McLachlan, Shore, and Weiniger, supra note 41, paras. 141–142.

107 Chukwumerije, supra note 97, at 193; Mayer, P., ‘Mandatory Rules of Law in International Arbitration’, (1986) 2 Arbitration International 274, at 291CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

108 Barraclough and Waincymer, supra note 36, at 218; Chukwumerije, supra note 97, at 193; see also World Duty Free Company Limited v. Republic of Kenya, supra note 106.

109 Thomas, supra note 8, at 575.

110 See Jean Estate v. Wires Jolley LLP, supra note 28, where it was found that even though these are mandatory law, an arbitrator may still adjudicate on the result.

111 Thomas, supra note 8, at 562; Naón, supra note 80, at 160.

112 Thomas, supra note 8, at 582.

113 Ibid.

114 See generally Jean Estate v. Wires Jolley LLP, supra note 28, at 360; Boldizar and Korhonen, supra note 4, at 299.

115 See, e.g., Rogers, supra note 4, at 4; Bidermann Industries Licensing Inc. v. Avmar, (1991) 570 NYS 2d 33 (1st Department).

116 Daly, supra note 10, at 1154. Where, such as in France, issues over conflict of interests are for the state bar to decide: O. d'Ormesson, ‘French Perspectives on the Duty of Loyalty: Comparisons with the American View’, in Daly and Goebel, supra note 46, 29, at 35.

117 Redfern and Hunter, supra note 2, at 366.

118 ABA Model Rule 8.5; CCBE Charter Rule 4.5.

119 Rogers, supra note 4, at 24.

120 (1991) 570 NYS 2d 33 (1st Department).

121 Ibid.

122 Ibid., at 23.

123 (1976) 51 AD 2d 705 (NY, 1st Department).

124 Partial Award of 1997, ICC Case 8879 (unpublished) in Naón, supra note 80, at 158.

125 Naón, supra note 80, at 159.

126 Nuclear Tests (Australia v. France), [1974] ICJ Rep. 253, at 259; see, e.g., Prosecutor v. Duško Tadić, Case No. IT-94-1-A-R77, ICTY Appeals Chamber Judgment on Allegations of Contempt against Prior Counsel, Milan Vujin (31 January 2000), para. 13; C. Brown, ‘The Inherent Powers of International Courts and Tribunals’, (2005) 76 BYIL 195, at 228; cf. L. Collins, ‘Provisional and Protective Measures in International Litigation’, (1992) 234 RdC 9.

127 See, e.g., UNCITRAL Rule Art. 15(1); ICC Rules Art. 15(1); see also the approach of the Iran–United States Claims Tribunal in E-Systems, Inc. v. Iran, (1983) 2 Ir-USCTR 51, at 57.

128 See generally Kurkela and Snellman, supra note 33.

129 Poudret and Besson, supra note 20, at 520.

130 Ibid., at 521.

131 International Chamber of Commerce Rules of Arbitration, Art. 25.

132 Ibid., Art. 2(iii).

133 Poudret and Besson, supra note 20, at 540.

134 See also the development of the acceptance for United States Courts to award punitive damages in Born, supra note 9, at 2485.

135 Naón, supra note 80, at 159.

136 Ibid.; cf. Born, supra note 9, at 2320–4.

137 Thomas, supra note 8, at 563.

138 See, e.g., In re Arbitration between R3 Aerospace Inc and Marshall of Cambridge Aerospace Ltd, (1996) 927 F Supp. 121 (SD NY), at 125; Thomas, supra note 8, at 563.

139 Partial Award of 2000 ICC Case 10776 (unpublished), in Naón, supra note 80, at 158.

140 Born, supra note 9, at 2320; Kurkela and Snellman, supra note 33, at 186; Gabriel, H. and Raymond, A. H., ‘Ethics for Commercial Arbitrators: Basic Principles and Emerging Standards’, (2005) 5 Wyoming Law Review 453, at 458Google Scholar.

141 Born, supra note 9, at 2323.

142 Société Ganz v. Société Nationale des Chemin de Fers Tunisiens, Revue de l'arbitral 478 CA Paris (1991), cited in T. E. Carbonneau and F. Janson, ‘Cartesian Logic and Frontier Politics: French and American Concepts of Arbitrability’, (1994) 2 TJICL 193, at 218.

143 Rogers, supra note 4, at 52.

144 Born, supra note 9, at 1919; ibid., at 56–7; see, e.g., Pope & Talbot Inc. v. Government of Canada in NAFTA Decision of 27 September (27 September 2000) (Dervaind P, Belman, and Greenberg), in McLachlan, Shore, and Weiniger, supra note 41.

145 Cf. Pope & Talbot Inc. v. Government of Canada in NAFTA Decision of 27 September, ibid., para. [12], in which the tribunal suggested that counsel voluntarily assume the costs.

146 Cf. the discussion of Goubran, S., ‘Conflicts of Duty: The Prennial Lawyer's Tale – A Comparative Study of the Law in England and Australia’, (2006) 30 Melbourne University Law Review 88Google Scholar.

147 With regards to the judicial system, see Black v. Taylor, [1993] 3 NZLR 403 (NZCA); Grimwade v. Meagher, [1995] 1 VR 446 (Victoria, Australia); Everingham v. Ontario, (1992) 88 DLR (4th) 755 (Ontario, Canada); and MacDonal Estate v. Martin, (1991) 77 DLR (4th) 249 (SCC).

148 Black v. Taylor, [1993] 3 NZLR 403 (NZCA), at 408.

149 Hazard and Dondi, supra note 79, at 239.

150 Ibid., at 237.

151 Board of Overseer of the Bars v. Lee (1980) 422 A 2d 998, at 1002 (ME, Supreme Judicial Court); see also C. W. Wolfram, Modern Legal Ethics (1986), 26.