Third-Party Funding of Arbitration: Focusing on Recent Legislations in Hong Kong and Singapore
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
As arbitration is widely used as an alternative dispute resolution mechanism, third-party funding, which is a person or entity with no prior interest in the legal dispute providing non-recourse financing for one of the parties, has become more prevalent with increasing costs of international arbitration. In particular, Hong Kong and Singapore are the first jurisdictions to adopt and implement legislations to specifically permit third-party funding of international arbitration. Thus, in this article, relevant issues with respect to third-party funding of arbitration, such as, conflicts of interest, disclosure, privilege and confidentiality of information, cost allocation, security for costs, and control over arbitral proceedings by the third-party funder are examined with pertinent provisions of the recent legislations. While the respective legislations of Hong Kong and Singapore may not directly address every issue raised by third-party funding of arbitration, as they make it clear that such is no longer prohibited by the old common law doctrines of champerty and maintenance, they have clarified conflicting case law as well as proactively promoted themselves as leading seats of international arbitration.
Abstract
As arbitration is widely used as an alternative dispute resolution mechanism, third-party funding, which is a person or entity with no prior interest in the legal dispute providing non-recourse financing for one of the parties, has become more prevalent with increasing costs of international arbitration. In particular, Hong Kong and Singapore are the first jurisdictions to adopt and implement legislations to specifically permit third-party funding of international arbitration. Thus, in this article, relevant issues with respect to third-party funding of arbitration, such as, conflicts of interest, disclosure, privilege and confidentiality of information, cost allocation, security for costs, and control over arbitral proceedings by the third-party funder are examined with pertinent provisions of the recent legislations. While the respective legislations of Hong Kong and Singapore may not directly address every issue raised by third-party funding of arbitration, as they make it clear that such is no longer prohibited by the old common law doctrines of champerty and maintenance, they have clarified conflicting case law as well as proactively promoted themselves as leading seats of international arbitration.
참고문헌 (33)
- "Black’s Law Dictionary" (2006)
- Born, Gary, "International Commercial Arbitration" (2009)
- Gayner, Oliver, "Singapore and Hong Kong: International Arbitration Meets Third Party Funding", Fordham International Law Journal, 40 (2017)
- Moseley, Sarah E., "Disclosing Third-party Funding in International Investment Arbitration", Texas Law Review, 9 (2019)
- "Singapore Expands the Permissibility of Third-Party Legal Finance, Burford Cap. (Oct. 11, 2019)"[URL]
- Scherer, Maxi C., "Third-party Funding in International Arbitration" (2013)
- "The Code of Practice for Third Party Funding of Arbitration", ~ (2017)
- "English Arbitration Act", ~ (1996)
- "Federal Rules of Civil Procedure", ~ (2019)
- "Hong Kong Arbitration Ordinance", ~ (2019)
- "Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC) Administered Arbitration Rules", ~ (2018)
- International Bar Association (IBA), "Guidelines on Conflicts of Interest in International Arbitration", ~ (2014)
- International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), "Arbitration Rules", ~ (2006)
- Proposals for Amendment of the ICSID Rules, Vol. 1, "ICSID", ~, pp.Working Paper #4 (2020)
- International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), "Arbitration Rules", ~ (2017)
- Report of the ICCA-Queen Mary Task Force on Third-party Funding in International Arbitration, , ~ (2018)
- "Singapore Civil Law Act, Chapter 43 (2017)", ~
- "Singapore International Arbitrators (SIArb) Guidelines to Third Party Funders (2017)", ~
- "Singapore International Arbitration Center (SIAC) Practice Note (2017)", ~
- "Singapore Legal Profession (Professional Conduct) (Amendment) Rules (2017)", ~
- "UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration (2006)", ~
- "ATA Constr., Indus. and Trading Co. v. Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan (ICSID Case No. ARB", 08, ~
- "Carlyle Inv. Mgmt. LLC v. Moonmouth Co., C.A. No. 7841-VCP (Feb. 24, 2015)", ~
- "Devon IT, Inc. v. IBM Corp., No. 10-2899 (E.D. Pa. Sept. 27, 2012)", ~
- EWHC 2361,
- "EuroGas Inc. and Belmont Res., Inc. v. Slovak Republic (ICSID Case No. ARB", 14, ~
- "Kardassopoulos and Fuchs v. Republic of Georgia (ICSID Case Nos. ARB", 05, 07, pp.15), Award (Mar. 3, 2010)
- "Leader Technologies v. Facebook, 719 F. Supp. 2d 373 (D. Del. 2010)", ~
- "Miller UK Ltd. v. Caterpillar, Inc., 17 F. Supp. 3d 711, 731-38 (N.D. Ill. 2014)", ~
- "Mondis Tech., Ltd. v. LG Elec., Inc., Nos. 2:07-CV-565-TJW-CE, 2:08-CV-478-TJW (E.D. Tex. May 4, 2011)", ~
- "Muhammet Cap & Sehil Insaat Endustri ve Ticaret Ltd. Sti v. Turkmenistan (ICSID Case No. ARB", 12, ~
- EWHC 2805,
- "RSM Prod. Corp. v. Grenada (ICSID Case No. ARB", 05, ~