Contact: Jill Bainbridge and Michaela Berryman; Blake Morgan (Southampton, England)
The High Court has recently attempted to clarify the requirement for serious harm in defamation cases and at which stage the seriousness of the harm should be assessed.
Contact: Att. Leyla Orak Celikboya; Erdem & Erdem (Turkey)
“… [E]very arbitrator’s perception of his or her role will be shaped by the legal and procedural culture with which he or she is most familiar.” International arbitration is, in fact, a hub for practitioners from various legal backgrounds. Applicable rules of procedure, place and language of arbitration, applicable laws to the merits of the dispute, the professional and legal background of arbitrators, and the nationality and legal culture of party counsel all provide diversity to international arbitration. However, inevitably, this diversity leads to the clash of customary practices, a dispute over acceptable and questionable practices, and the means to a due and proper resolution of disputes.
Contact: Prof. Dr. H. Ercument Erdem; Erdem & Erdem (Turkey)
The first step towards establishing an International Center of Finance in Istanbul was taken through a resolution of the Turkish Higher Planning Council. One of the pillars of the Istanbul Finance Center and one of its priorities is the establishment of an independent and autonomous institutional arbitration center that is capable of competing internationally. The Istanbul Arbitration Center (“ISTAC”) is established in line with these objectives to provide services for institutional arbitration.This arbitration center is expected to be ahead of other arbitration institutions in matters such as speed and finalization of awards.
Contact: Att. Ezgi Babur; Erdem & Erdem (Turkey)
Evidentiary issues in international arbitration are of great importance, based on their impact on fulfilling the burden of proof, and consequently, on the decisions on merits. The taking of evidence is regulated under the International Bar Association (“IBA”) Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration (“IBA Rules” or, Rules”), which is referred to in many arbitral proceedings as a point of reference for evidentiary issues, both in the arbitrations conducted under institutional rules, and also in ad hoc arbitrations. The Rules provide for a helpful basis, especially if the parties and the arbitrators come from different legal systems.
In this article, we analyze the general framework and principles of the provisions of the IBA Rules on document production requests, while the grounds for objection to document production requests under Art. 9.2 of the Rules will be analyzed in our next article.
When acquiring a business that has environmental issues, or title to a contaminated property, the buyer will often establish a corporation or a limited liability company (LLC). Officers, directors, members or managers operating within the corporate or LLC structure believe that such structures will insulate them from personal liability. The responsible corporate officer (RCO) doctrine, however, has eroded (if not eradicated) that liability protection. Under that doctrine, any officer, director, member or manager who is responsible for influencing company policies can be held personally liable as an RCO for environmental violations committed by anyone in the company. The liability arises simply if there is a connection between the environmental violation and the policies the RCO enacted, or failed to enact. In a corporation or LLC with only a few officers, directors, members or managers, those few people will always be responsible for setting policy. In other words, they will always be an RCO. As a result, when you are considering acquiring a business or real property that has an environmental risk component, you must consider how best to protect your personal assets from RCO liability.