Sentences with phrase «arbitration process so»

Not exact matches

I hope that the State will work to keep the arbitration process moving so that the facts and foundation of the Compact can be presented to the arbitration panel, rather than clouded by political threats, rhetoric, insults and even jokes in the press.

In mid-April, Mulgrew agreed with Klein to streamline the teacher - discipline process in a way that, by the end of the year, will close New York's so - called rubber rooms, the infamous «reassignment centers» where the New York City teachers charged with the most extreme incompetence or misconduct (currently 600 out of 80,000) are sent to do nothing while they await tenure - protected arbitration hearings.

2014 has started with a bang from an arbitration perspective with the decision in S v S [2014] EWHC 7 (Fam), [2014] All ER (D) 63 (Jan), involving the conversion of an arbitration award to a financial consent order and comments from Sir James Munby that «an arbitral award is surely of its nature even stronger than a simple agreement between the parties» and «the judge will not need to play the detective unless something leaps off the page to indicate that something has gone so seriously wrong in the arbitral process as fundamentally to vitiate the arbitral award».

In addition to providing an overview of new accident benefits arbitration process under the License Appeal Tribunal (LAT), which came into effect on April 1, 2016, Michelle will share valuable anecdotal discussion of what counsel have experienced so far on both sides, such as evidentiary and production issues at the case conference stage and before a hearing, what evidence adjudicators are looking for or emphasizing, the format of the hearing (written, oral, hybrid), witness issues, etc..

This shows exactly why the expediency of the arbitration process is so important in relation to costs, as the major costs — the firm's fees — are largely driven by the time it takes an arbitration to conclude.

The LCC works to improve the arbitration and mediation process for large complex disputes so as to provide constructive and effective methods of dispute resolution.

The challenge of arbitration is to ensure that the process does not become so stringent and burdened by procedure and rules, that the ultimate purpose for a resolution of the substance of the dispute is delayed or buried.

A party now faced with the prospect of having to arbitrate a dispute may now have a realistic opportunity to avoid that process, if so desired, if there is any reasonable prospect of persuading the Court that the case may be more efficiently resolved by means of a summary judgment motion than an arbitration.

So if confidentiality is important (such as a dispute over trade secrets) it is generally a good idea to expressly state that both the arbitration itself and all information disclosed during the process is confidential.

In fact, the Singapore High Court went further to state that it would be an abuse of process to allow a party who had raised a jurisdictional challenge but chose not to participate in most part of the arbitration, to wait till the opposing party goes through the entire arbitral process, obtains an award, only to be met by a setting aside application at the seat when it could have done so within the 30 - day period under Article 16 (3) of the Model Law.

ART solves that by mimicking a process that already goes on within the bigger arbitration shops, where people email each other and ask: «has anyone seen so and so?»

The intervention of national courts is often needed in connection with starting, preventing, promoting, assisting and terminating arbitration, so the arbitration process is seldom entirely free of national courts.

In only one case was a decision made that «good faith» negotiation had not occurred, and this involved a situation where the grantee had made little attempt to engage with the native title party and had made clear that it was participating in the RTN process only so that it could proceed to arbitration by the Tribunal... these findings strongly suggest that grantee parties have little to fear from the arbitration process... Unless they engage in behaviour that patently demonstrates the absence of an intention to engage in negotiation, they appear unlikely to be required to re-commence the RTN process with a consequent delay in project development.