Daniel Avila is joined by Gerard Meijer (Arbitration Partner at Linklaters) and Marieke Witkamp (Independent Arbitrator at Arbitra International) to discuss the key attributes that make the Netherlands a leading arbitration hub.

The conversation delves into the country's arbitration-friendly judiciary, its role as host to the Permanent Court of Arbitration, and the English-language Netherlands Commercial Court. Highlighting its practical, business-focused approach to procedure, the discussion also explores the Netherlands' reputation as an "attachment paradise," its efficient enforcement of domestic awards, and its high confirmation rates for both domestic and international awards. Additionally, the speakers examine the Netherlands' early adoption of innovations like emergency arbitration, consolidation, and e-arbitration.

Nishant Choudhary of DFDL Myanmar joins Joyce Fong to unpack Myanmar’s arbitration regime, from the legal framework to enforcement. The discussion explores how Myanmar’s arbitration laws interface with international norms, then turns to the strategic considerations that drive the choice of seat for Myanmar-related disputes. The conversation also assesses the Myanmar courts’ approach to arbitration and enforcement, as well as observable trends in Myanmar-related arbitrations.

Host Joyce Fong and Noppadon (Ton) Treephetchara of DFDL Bangkok discuss Thailand’s arbitration framework, highlighting its Model Law basis, cost-effectiveness, and supportive judiciary. They then compare Thailand with regional alternatives, review institutional preferences (THAC and TAI), and examine local court support. The episode outlines enforcement procedures, timelines, and practical tips, and concludes with trends and THAC’s modernization efforts.  

This episode is recorded in Spanish.

Francisco Rodriguez and Gilberto Guerrero-Rocca explore how Latin American states have developed sophisticated, long-term strategies to defend against treaty-based claims. The episode examines the unique challenges these sovereign “repeat players” face, such as budget constraints, political pressures, and transparency issues. The discussion highlights the evolving tactics and contradictions in how these states approach international arbitration. 

International arbitration partner Lucy Winnington-Ingram explores the increasingly significant role of tribunal secretaries in international arbitration. Lucy unpacks the legal and procedural challenges that can arise when tribunal secretaries move beyond their traditional administrative functions and become involved in substantive aspects of decision-making. She then offers practical guidance on how to avoid common pitfalls that could jeopardize the integrity of arbitral proceedings.

----more----

Transcript:

Intro: Welcome to Arbitral Insights, a podcast series brought to you by our International Arbitration Practice lawyers here at Reed Smith. I'm Peter Rosher, Global Head of Reed Smith's International Arbitration Practice. I hope you enjoy the industry commentary, insights and anecdotes we share with you in the course of this series, wherever in the world you are. If you have any questions about any of the topics discussed, please do contact our speakers. And with that, let's get started. 

Lucy: Welcome to another episode of Arbitral Insights. I'm Lucy Winnington-Ingram. I'm a partner in Reed Smith's London office in our international arbitration team. I'm going to be running through some very high-level takeaways, discussing challenges based on the misuse of tribunal secretaries in international arbitration. So I think the starting point when thinking about this issue is recognizing that arbitration is a method of dispute resolution, which is premised on the consent of the parties. And the persons determining the dispute, i.e. the tribunal, are typically party appointed. And that's really a central tenet of international arbitration. So it's against that background that challenges to arbitral awards based on the alleged misuse of tribunal secretaries have increased. And this issue really goes to the heart of the legitimacy and enforceability of arbitration as a dispute resolution mechanism. And it's one that's generated significant academic debate, challenges to awards and institutional reform in recent years. So the arbitrator's mandate is strictly personal, and that means that their decision-making function cannot be delegated. However, as arbitrations have become more complex and document-heavy, the increased use of tribunal secretaries, sometimes called administrative secretaries or assistants, has become widespread, and their intended role is to support the tribunal, primarily with administrative and organizational tasks. But increasingly, there's a growing concern that tribunal secretaries may overstep their intended role, moving from administrative support into substantive decision-making. And this has given rise to the so-called fourth arbitrator problem. And that's a term that was coined as early as 2002 to describe the fear that a tribunal secretary might, in effect, become an unappointed and unauthorized decision-maker in the arbitration. And very understandably, there are concerns this will damage the legitimacy of the arbitral process. So the use and potential misuse of tribunal secretaries has therefore come under increasing scrutiny, both in academic commentary and in the challenges to arbitration awards that we're seeing, and also in terms of challenges to arbitrators themselves. So one of the first known challenges to an award, based at least in part on the actions of a tribunal secretary, was a Paris Court of Appeal case from 1990. And in that case, the appellant, Honeywell, sought to set aside an ICC award, alleging that the tribunal secretary had interfered during the hearing. Now, the Paris Court of Appeal dismissed the challenge, noting that the appointment of a secretary was permitted and that Honeywell had not demonstrated how the secretary would have interfered. So this case sets a sort of early precedent that mere involvement of a secretary without evidence of improper influence would not suffice to overturn an award. The next case we can look at then is Sonatrach and Statoil. And this came over two decades later in 2014. Now, in that case, the parties had expressly agreed that the tribunal secretary's role would be limited to administrative tasks and the Tribunal Secretary would have no right to participate in the decision-making process. Sonatrach later argued that the Secretary had exceeded this remit by preparing substantive notes for the Tribunal and therefore challenged the ICC award under Section 68 of the Arbitration Act. When considering this, the English High Court found no improper delegation emphasizing that the arbitrators had not abdicated their decision-making function as the Secretary's notes had only formed part of the Tribunal's deliberations. In that sense, then, the Tribunal Secretary himself had had no substantive decision-making role. A more fully articulated challenge came not long after this in 2015, and this is perhaps one of the better known challenges, and it arose in the Yukos set-aside proceedings in The Hague. So there, Russia argued that the tribunal's assistant had effectively drafted large portions of the award, and they pointed to the time records in the fee notes that showed that the tribunal secretary's hours were between 40 to 70 percent higher than those of any tribunal member. And Russia actually went so far as to submit a report from a linguistics expert, which concluded that it was extremely likely that the tribunal secretary had written significant sections of the award himself. So when it came to setting aside the awards, these were actually set aside on alternative grounds. And therefore, the relevant district court did not address Russia's complaints relating to the involvement of the tribunal secretary in the proceedings. However, in 2020, the Court of Appeal in The Hague overturned the district court decision and in doing so, it addressed Russia's arguments in relation to the Tribunal Secretary. And there, the Court of Appeal ultimately held that unless the parties had agreed otherwise, a tribunal may use a secretary to assist with drafting parts of an arbitral award as it sees fit, provided that it's the arbitrators themselves who assume responsibility for the final decision. So in effect the finding was that the mere drafting of parts of an award by an Arbitral Secretary did not automatically amount to a violation of the Tribunal's mandate. So whilst the Court of Appeal conceded that the Tribunal had failed to fully inform the parties of the nature and extent of the Tribunal Secretary's work, this did not amount to a major procedural violation. So turning then to the most recent challenge to an arbitral award on the alleged misuse of a tribunal secretary, this was brought before the Belgian Supreme Court in 2023 in Emek and WTE and the European Commission. And there, the applicants alleged that the tribunal secretary had drafted non-factual sections of a partial award. However, the Belgian Supreme Court affirmed that a secretary may draft an award completely or in part as long as the tribunal reviews and validates the work. So the Supreme Court felt that this understanding of the tribunal's mandate aligned with the ICC's guidance, which I'm going to talk about in a little bit more detail later, which explicitly allows for secretaries to prepare notes and memoranda, which could conceivably then form part of any final award. So I think one point to note is that challenges relating to the use of tribunal secretaries are not limited to challenges to arbitral awards. A number of challenges have also been brought in relation to arbitrators themselves. So, for example, in P&Q, a 2017 English High Court case, the claimant there applied for the removal of all three arbitrators appointed in an LCIA arbitration, alleging improper delegation of tasks to the Tribunal Secretary. And there, the claimant relied on time records, again, as in Yukos, and also an email from the chairman seeking the secretary's views on a procedural issue. Now, in that case, the court dismissed the application, again distinguishing between permissible support and impermissible delegation, reaffirming that the core adjudicative function must remain with the arbitrators. The judge did, however, note that whilst receiving input from a secretary does not automatically preclude independent decision-making, best practice is to avoid involving secretaries in anything that could be seen as expressing a view on the substance of the dispute. So taking all of this together then, these cases all reveal a number of key themes. First, the strictly personal nature of an arbitrator's mandate to determine the dispute. So it's clear that an arbitrator's decision-making function is strictly personal and cannot be delegated. And this is closely related to the central feature of arbitration, a party's ability to select its arbitrators. Parties choose their arbitrators for their judgment and expertise, and this is central to the legitimacy of the process. Secondly, in a number of cases, issues arise regarding the proper role of a tribunal secretary in the arbitral process. So there's a spectrum of tasks that secretaries may perform, ranging from purely administrative, so things like organizing hearings, managing documents, etc., to more substantive, conducting research, drafting procedural orders, even drafting sections of what may become the final award. Now, the further a secretary's tasks move towards analysis and decision-making, the greater the risk of challenge. The question then is what tasks and responsibilities can be safely delegated to a tribunal secretary for reasons of procedural efficiency before their role risks trespassing on that of the arbitrators. Third and finally, many challenges arise from a lack of clarity or agreement about the secretary's role. And this links back to what I was just talking about, about what tasks and responsibilities can be delegated. So early and explicit agreement on the scope of the secretary's task is crucial to avoid disputes later on. And parties are increasingly looking to do this in the procedural orders that are agreed at the outset of the case. In response to these concerns, arbitral institutions have developed increasingly detailed rules and guidelines. So many have introduced rules that a tribunal secretary can only be appointed on agreement of the party. So we see this in the LCIA rules and the SIAC rules. But certain institutions also require consultation with the parties on the secretary's tasks, such as the SEC. And the LCIA now has perhaps the most robust framework, as its rules expressly prohibit delegation of the tribunal's decision-making function and require express party consent for the Secretary's tasks. And the LCIA's Notes for Arbitrators sets out a list of permissible tasks, including administrative support, attending hearings, preparing drafts of procedural orders and awards, but it's very clear that all of these tasks have to be done under the supervision of the tribunal. What we see that is common across all the major arbitral rules is this expressed prohibition on the delegation of the tribunal's decision-making function. So what's the sort of best practice takeaways from this in terms of what can parties and tribunals do to mitigate the risks? Well, first, early engagement with the tribunal on the secretary's role. The best safeguard is to address the issue at the outset. The party should discuss and agree the scope of the secretary's work, ideally in writing, and ensure that everyone is clear on what tasks are permissible. And as I said, often this takes the form of the first procedural order. Next, transparency. So the tribunal should be very transparent about the secretary's involvement, keeping the parties informed and seeking consent wherever required, or wherever there's a deviation from what the parties have previously agreed. Next, supervision. So all work done by the secretary should be under the close supervision of the tribunal, with the arbitrators personally reviewing and approving any substantive work. And finally, the provision of institutional guidance. So where necessary, arbitral institutions should continue to provide further guidance on the role of tribunal secretaries in order to more clearly define their roles and reduce the risk of challenges based on the scope of work of the tribunal secretary. Thanks very much for listening. If you have any questions around this topic, please do not hesitate to reach out to me. And we look forward to you tuning in to another episode of Arbitral Insights. 

Outro: Arbitral Insights is a Reed Smith production. Our producers are Ali McCardell and Shannon Ryan. For more information about Reed Smith's global international arbitration practice, email [email protected]. To learn about the Reed Smith Arbitration Pricing Calculator, a first of its kind mobile app that forecasts the cost of arbitration around the world, search Arbitration Pricing Calculator on reedsmith.com or download for free through the Apple and Google Play app stores. You can find our podcast on podcast streaming platforms, reedsmith.com, and our social media accounts at Reed Smith LLP. 

Disclaimer: This podcast is provided for educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice and is not intended to establish an attorney-client relationship, nor is it intended to suggest or establish standards of care applicable to particular lawyers in any given situation. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Any views, opinions, or comments made by any external guest speaker are not to be attributed to Reed Smith LLP or its individual lawyers. 

All rights reserved. 

Transcript is auto-generated.

Joyce Fong welcomes Afriyan Rachmad (Partner, Nusantara DFDL Partnership) to discuss Indonesia’s dispute resolution landscape. They cover interim court measures, enforcement timelines and procedures, seat selection strategy and practical tips for recognizing foreign awards. The episode also touches on the broader legal environment and recent trends shaping Indonesia-related arbitrations.

----more----

Transcript:

Intro: Welcome to Arbitral Insights, a podcast series brought to you by our international arbitration practice lawyers here at Reed Smith. I'm Peter Rosher, Global Head of Reed Smith's International Arbitration Practice. I hope you enjoy the industry commentary, insights and anecdotes we share with you in the course of this series, wherever in the world you are. If you have any questions about any of the topics discussed, please do contact our speakers. And with that, let's get started. 

Joyce: Welcome to the latest episode of our Arbitral Insights podcast series. This is the third in a series of podcasts which I'm doing with DFDL, exploring arbitration across various jurisdictions in South and Southeast Asia. For this episode, I'm delighted to host Afriyan Rachmad, who will share insights from Indonesia. Afriyan is a partner at Nusantara DFDL partnership, an Indonesian law firm, and a DFDL collaborating firm. He is a projects and infrastructure specialist with particular expertise in natural resources and infrastructure projects. Afriyan’s dispute resolution practice includes litigation and arbitration. Selamat siang, Afriyan. Thank you for joining me today on this podcast. 

Afriyan: Hi Joyce, thank you for inviting me to this podcast. 

Joyce: To kick us off, perhaps you could give us an overview of the dispute resolution landscape in Indonesia. Tell us about the laws which form the legal framework for arbitration in Indonesia. Are they based on the UNCITRAL model law? And does the same law apply to both domestic and foreign arbitration? 

Afriyan: Okay, the legal framework for arbitration in Indonesia is under law No. 30 of 1999 concerning arbitration and alternative dispute resolution. While they are not based on the UNCITRAL Model Law, although some provisions are adopting it. Yes, the arbitration law applies for domestic and foreign arbitration, although there are different sections for domestic and foreign arbitration. 

Joyce: With these laws in place, would you say that arbitration is commonly used to resolve disputes in Indonesia? 

Afriyan: In Indonesia, arbitration is more towards the complex disputes due to the high arbitration fee involved for conducting arbitration proceedings. The arbitration fee is based on percentage of claim value filed by the claimant. From a range of zero point six percent for claim above two trillion rupiah, approximately USD hundred twenty five million, to ten percent for claim less than one billion rupiah approximately USD 62,500. This is according to the BANI Domestic Arbitration Forum. On the other hand, court fees are in the range of USD 100 to 300 depending on the number of parties. Court litigation is however slower as it could take around three years to obtain a final and binding decision from district court to supreme court compared to arbitral award that could be rendered in approximately six months. 

Joyce: So from what you've just said, Afriyan, arbitration appears to be faster but more expensive than court litigation. This is not at all surprising and is consistent with global trends. Given the significant cost difference, when do parties tend to choose to arbitrate their disputes? 

Afriyan: Generally speaking, parties arbitrate more complicated disputes. For example, in construction disputes where they prefer an arbitrator who has expertise in the subject matter. Court judges just tend to have legal rather than technical knowledge. Parties also tend to choose arbitration where the dispute is between a foreign party and a local party or local company. I've seen in the past that parties tend to select the dispute resolution mechanism which is best suited for their dispute. regardless of the dispute resolution clause in their contract. I have seen cases where parties agree to arbitrate the dispute only after the dispute arises. I have also seen cases where parties agree to court litigation even though the contract has an arbitration clause. This tends to be accommodate parties' circumstances. For example, if one party causes an arbitration fee, Although the arbitration fee will be borne equally by both claimant and defendant, however, in practice, the claimant shall pay full in advance before the arbitration proceeding could be started. This is particularly for cases handled by BANI. 

Joyce: So picking up on a point which you've just raised, Afryan, foreign parties often prefer arbitration of a litigation when contracting with a local party. There tends to be concerns with litigating on the local party's home turf, where the foreign party may be unfamiliar with the local court procedure and may also perceive the local party to have an upper hand. I think this is especially the case if the local party is well connected or linked to the government. Based on your experience, when parties agree to arbitrate, do parties tend to choose Indonesian or foreign arbitral seats? 

Afriyan: Well, this perception I think can be used by parties. But if the balance of power is equal during the contract negotiation, parties tend to choose international arbitration. for example, seated in Singapore or Paris with SIAC or ICC administrating. The main reason probably international arbitration proceeding is more comfortable for foreign parties compared to domestic arbitration institution. If the local Indonesian party is likely to be the defaulting party under the contract, an Indonesian seat with BANI administrating is popular. Jakarta is often selected as the seat, unless there is another seat which has closer connection to the dispute. For example, the parties may choose Bali or Kalimantan as a seat where the dispute relates to a construction project there. There is a famous case between PT Pertamina and PT Lirik Petroleum, in which the case was handled by BANI. This case was brought appealed to Supreme Court when was requested for enforcement. And Supreme Court at that time made consideration that the case is deemed as foreign arbitral award due to the race element of foreign in the contract, although the parties are Indonesian and it was handled by BANI, particularly BANI Mampang. In end of 2024, a lecturer filed a case to concessional court to review definition of foreign arbitral award under the arbitration law and constitutional court give a decision that a case considered as foreign arbitration proceeding or domestic arbitration proceeding based on territorial principle in which if the case was handled by foreign arbitration institution and seated not within the Indonesian territory then it will be considered as foreign arbitration proceeding. I will also add that there are two different institutions called BANI in Indonesia. It was started in 2016 and for around six years there are duality in BANI, which is BANI Mampang and BANI Sovereign. Both parties were arguing in civil court, state administrative court, and commercial court for trademark violation. In the recent years, BANI Mampang tends to be more popular than the BANI Sovereign, since currently we cannot find BANI Sovereign website or legal domicile address of this BANI Sovereign. Due to this invariability and taking consideration of the amount of the case that is being handled, we will suggest for any dispute that would like to choose local arbitration or domestic arbitration institution to choose BANI Mampang. 

Joyce: Thank you for the helpful insight on the two BANIs. It's certainly important to nominate the right BANI if parties intend to select BANIs as an arbitral institution. Otherwise, there is being satellite litigation over which BANI was the parties intended. I also find it quite interesting what you said about all arbitrations in Indonesia being deemed to be domestic, regardless of whether there's a foreign element and which institution administers the arbitration. On that note, is ad hoc arbitration common in Indonesia? 

Afriyan: Although ad hoc arbitration is permitted in Indonesia, but it is not common to the best of my experience, Joyce. 

Joyce: Okay, okay. Just going back then to the choice of Indonesia as a seat, what are the advantages to parties for seating and arbitration in Indonesia? 

Afriyan: According to the arbitration law, it is easier to enforce a domestic award in Indonesia due to the arbitral award in Bahasa Indonesia. The arbitral award can go directly to the local district court to register the award for enforcement. Note that this must be done within 30 days from the date of the award. If it is missed, then the domestic arbitral award could not be requested for enforcement to the district court. The winning party could wait until the counterparty voluntarily do the domestic arbitral award or to file a new case at the district court and the domestic arbitral award will be the primary evidence. For foreign awards, the arbitral award must first go to the Central Jakarta District Court to request for the issuance of execution of the award. Before bringing that word to the local district court who has jurisdiction to conduct execution over the losing party. Note that arbitration law requires few documents to be filed together with the original arbitral award issued by the foreign arbitration institution. There is, however, no time limit for filing this enforcement of foreign arbitral award to the Central Jakarta District Court compared to the domestic arbitral award that I have mentioned previously. 

Joyce: My takeaway from what you've just said, Afriyan, is that domestic awards, in other words, awards which are issued in Indonesia-centered arbitrations, lead to quicker and fast reinforcement in Indonesia. What are some possible hurdles to registering a domestic award in the local district court? 

Afriyan: So previously is about time when they doing examination of the request of this enforcement of arbitral award. Before 2023, there is unclear regulation for the district court to examine of this enforcement. But Supreme Court has issued a regulation in 2023 to give guidelines for the judges at the district court who handle enforcement of the domestic arbitral award and also for foreign arbitral award. And now we need to see how the district court shall accommodate this issue of time. 

Joyce: So just to be clear, Afriyan, following the regulation in 2023, how long will it take for domestic awards to be enforced in the local district courts, at least in theory? 

Afriyan: In theory there is no time so that's why in practice it can take weeks, months, sometimes. But from the Supreme Court regulation in 2023, it gives guideline for the judges to examine the request for enforcement of arbitral award which within 14 calendar days. So they will need to issue whether they can accept for the enforcement, whether they approve the enforcement, or they reject this request for enforcement of arbitral award. 

Joyce: I see. Let's now turn to foreign awards. You mentioned earlier that a party must bring the foreign award to the Central Jakarta District Court so that the award can be enforced. Can the decision of the Central Jakarta District Court be appealed? 

Afriyan: Yes, a party can appeal if the Central Jakarta District Court has denied enforcement of the foreign award, in which the appeal shall need to be filed to Supreme Court as the highest judicial institution in Indonesia. If the Central Jakarta District Court has granted enforcement, no further legal remedies could be taken based on the arbitration law. Apart from the above, parties can file annulment over the arbitral award, either foreign or domestic, at the Central Jakarta District Court or to the local district court in the case of domestic arbitral award. With recent, among others, letters of documents submitted in the hearing, which are admitted to be forged or are declared to be forgeries after the award has been rendered. B. Documents are found after the award has been rendered which are decisive in nature and were deliberately concealed by the opposing party. Or at last, an award is made based on fraud committed by one of the parties to the dispute. This is according to Article 70 of the arbitration law. 

Joyce: That's really helpful to know, Afriyan. Another factor which determines a seat's attractiveness is the local court's willingness to uphold and support the arbitration process. Would you describe the Indonesian courts as being generally pro-arbitration? 

Afriyan: Yes, provided the contract is not against public policy and complies with Indonesian law. I have three examples. Firstly, gambling contracts are illegal in Indonesia. An award enforcing a gambling contract will not be enforced in Indonesia. Other example that a contract, despite their governing laws, which has Indonesian party who entered to the contract, shall need to make Bahasa Indonesia available. This requirement is regulated under law number 24 of 2009. Finally, disputes arising from joint venture agreements may face enforcement obstacles, particularly if the merits of the case involves foreign ownership structures that are inconsistent, with the Indonesian foreign investment regulation. If the contract is compliant, the courts do not tend to treat domestic and foreign awards differently. 

Joyce: That's interesting to hear. For me, this really emphasizes the importance of doing proper due diligence before entering into the contract to avoid problems down the line. How about orders in support of arbitration, such as injunctions or asset preservation orders? Can the Indonesian courts issue such orders? 

Afriyan: Yes, it is straightforward to enforce domestic interim orders issued by the tribunal in support of arbitration, such as confiscation orders. However, foreign orders can be difficult to de-register since the Supreme Court regulation only address enforcement of asset preservation order or security attachment as ordered by arbitral tribunals in Indonesia. It is more difficult to obtain interim orders from the court as the order needs to be attached to a main case. In principle, Indonesian civil procedure does not allow for stand-alone interim relief. Such injunction or asset preservation orders, unless there is an ongoing main case before the court. 

Joyce: That's interesting to know. Now, turning back to enforcement, and we touched on this briefly earlier, what grounds do parties tend to use to challenge recognition and enforcement of awards in Indonesia? 

Afriyan: As I explained earlier, no need to recognize and enforce domestic awards. They can be enforced directly at the local district court. Only foreign awards need to be recognized and enforced. Common arguments raised are the awards against Indonesian laws and regulations, public policy, and annulment reason as regulated under Article 70 of the arbitration law. Like I mentioned previously, like fake documents, forgery kind of thing. 

Joyce: I see. So bearing in mind what you've just said during this podcast session, what should parties and tribunals do to maximize their chances of a successful enforcement in Indonesia? 

Afriyan: I think we need to see from the contracting states or from the early states to ensure that the contract complies with Indonesian law. This is where local council advice is helpful, even if the governing law is not Indonesian law. Under the Indonesian Civil Code, there are four important elements for a contract to be valid. First, there must be a consent of the parties who are bound thereby. Second there must be capacity to enter into an obligation third there must be a specific subject matter and last there must be a permitted cause or in accordance with the Indonesian laws and regulation example of point this is that the node in particular the requirement for availability of Indonesian language under law number 24 of 2009 for contract the SSH and Indonesian party In practice, the contract will be made in bilingual language and the parties may choose English as the governing language. After the award is issued, ensure that all the relevant formalities and documents are comply with for enforcement. For example, the court requires the original wedding awards, which can be tight timing for domestic awards which have to be enforced within 30 days. Also, if the word is not in Bahasa, a sworn translation must be prepared. 

Joyce: It's all very helpful tips. Thank you. One final question as we wrap up. Have you observed any trends in Indonesia-related arbitrations which our listeners should be aware of? 

Afriyan: Well, since COVID-19 in 2020, virtual hearings have been on the rise. While convenient, these raise all sorts of issues. For example, confidentiality issues. Unlike in-person hearings, parties need to be mindful of their surroundings and the impact on confidentiality of the arbitration process. BANI also issued a new rules in 2025 that comprise among others the availability of emergency arbitration for case handled by them with arbitration fee of 200 million rupiah, and is a fixed fee and shorter period of arbitration proceeding. But interesting to see how this develops and how the enforcement of emergency arbitration when it is requested to the court. Indeed, I look forward to hearing more about how this develops. 

Joyce: Afriyan, thank you so much for your time today. This has been really insightful and I've learned so much. 

Afriyan: Thank you, Joyce. Thank you again for inviting me to this podcast. 

Joyce: My pleasure. Take care. 

Outro: Arbitral Insights is a Reed Smith production. Our producers are Ali McCardell and Shannon Ryan. For more information about Reed Smith's Global international arbitration practice, email [email protected]. To learn about the Reed Smith Arbitration Pricing Calculator, a first-of-its-kind mobile app that forecasts the cost of arbitration around the world, search Arbitration Pricing Calculator on reedsmith.com or download for free through the Apple and Google Play app stores. You can find our podcast on podcast streaming platforms, reedsmith.com and our social media accounts at Reed Smith LLP. 

Disclaimer: This podcast is provided for educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice and is not intended to establish an attorney-client relationship, nor is it intended to suggest or establish standards of care applicable to particular lawyers in any given situation. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Any views, opinions, or comments made by any external guest speaker are not to be attributed to Reed Smith LLP or its individual lawyers. 

All rights reserved.

Transcript is auto-generated.

Host Gautam Bhattacharyya welcomes Isha Shakir of Henderson Chambers for this episode of Spotlight on… The conversation explores Isha’s decision to enter the legal profession as a barrister, mentors she has benefited from along the way, career highlights to date and what SAHM 2025 means to her.

----more----

Transcript:

Intro: Welcome to Arbitral Insights, a podcast series brought to you by our international arbitration practice lawyers here at Reed Smith. I'm Peter Rosher, Global Head of Reed Smith's International Arbitration Practice. I hope you enjoy the industry commentary, insights and anecdotes we share with you in the course of this series, wherever in the world you are. If you have any questions about any of the topics discussed, please do contact our speakers. And with that, let's get started. 

Gautam: Hello, everyone, and welcome to our latest episode of our Spotlight on podcast series. And this is one of our special mini-series to mark South Asian Heritage Month 2025, the theme of which is Roots to Roots. And I'm really delighted today to have as our guest the wonderful Isha Shakir. Isha is a barrister at Henderson Chambers in London. I've been really looking forward to this discussion with her because she's really one of the real bright stars at the bar. And I know she's got a huge career in front of her. She's already done lots and lots, and I'm going to introduce you to her by saying a few words about her. So Isha, as I mentioned, is a barrister at Henderson Chambers. She has a broad practice, both litigation and arbitration, and inquiries of which she has considerable experience. And interestingly she's involved currently in the Dieselgate group litigation and amongst other things in the post office inquiry. It's a really great experience and amongst her areas also she can include insolvency and various aspects of commercial law practice. So it's really really good to have you on Isha. I'm really looking forward to our discussion. Let me ask you this to get us going then. Tell us a little bit about your background, because this is about heritage. So tell us a little bit about your, well, first of all, maybe your family's background, your own personal background in terms of your journey to where you are today as a, as I say, a bright star at the bar and why you chose to do law and ultimately also why you wanted to become a barrister.

Isha: Sure. Well, firstly, it's an honour to be on your podcast, and it's an honour to meet you. In terms of my family's background, so my granddad emigrated here to the UK from Pakistan, and he chose this little town called Bishop Auckland in County Durham to settle down. He had my dad, so my dad is first generation English, and my mum is Pakistani, and that's my background so I grew up in Bishop Auckland which is in County Durham next to Newcastle that's the accent I'm trying to retain my accent in a form of defiance.

Gautam: You should be very proud of it you should be very proud of that accent.

Isha: I am I'm very proud of it I am and so I guess where I started was you know growing up in Bishop Auckland and it's quite serious from the get-go because I'm the only ethnic minority in my school and also in my town and I'm the only visibly Muslim person there too and as I grow up I realized that during school and you know when I walked to town there is a lot of resistance against who I am and my identity in the form of Islamophobia, racism and it was quite intense growing up because you know I can tell you my first memory of primary school is being called dirty sat on a bench crying and I told the teachers about this and this is like a reoccurring story in my life is that I do tell people and nothing is done and I'm told to have thicker skin I think that was the sort of starting point for me to go internal and to gain this resilience and strength from myself from my faith and to then embrace my identity years later, which was the cause of so much pain growing up. And just moving on to secondary school, it was no better. In fact, it was a lot worse because, I mean, kids at that age are very judgmental. But when incidents happen, like terrorist incidents or whatever, I would be called a terrorist. I'd be told it was my fault. I'd be spat on. One of the main incidents was that a teacher drew the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, on the board. And thought that was okay and a funny thing to do. And this is like, this is the background that I guess created who I am. And another sort of pivotal moment, I think, in my life was a careers advisor. You know, I went to a state school. I'm the first in my family to eventually go to university and the first in my family to have a proper profession in that sense. And I was really motivated growing up to go to uni and I wanted to do that so I told that to my careers advisor and she said to me that I wasn't smart enough to go to university and I should do a beautician course in the local college instead and that was her advice to me without looking at my grades without assessing my aspirations without knowing anything about me I was stereotyped into being a beautician and then even more heartbreaking is when I leave the this meeting this awful meeting and I talk to my school colleagues and they say that they were told the exact opposite that they were told to go to university and to aim high and I just thought that is systematic racism that I've had to come across and it took, it actually devastated me for about a week. And I went home and I was crying and my parents were asking me, you know, what's, what's going on? Come on, tell us. And then I told them, and that is, I think. The support that I received from them is so important in my life because they just said to me, don't let anyone tell you no. You go for it and you try. And it's going to be hard. It's not going to be easy. But if you work hard, if you hold on to your faith, you can accomplish things. And I really internalized that. And I was like, okay, these people are writing me off. They're underestimating me, which still happens to this day. And we'll talk about that. But it doesn't define my capabilities and my potential right I I can do I can change, opinions and I can aspire for great things so I used that incident as well to convince my family to let me go to a six form and outside of my little town in a different town called Darlington and I convinced them to let me travel on the bus for an hour and a half each day to get there. And that place was a bit more, it was more diverse. I didn't feel like the odd one out. And the teachers were really supportive. And I managed to get good grades at A-level and I got into York University. And as I started university, that careers advisor was still in the back of my mind. And I was thinking, I got in, that's great, but am I really smart enough to be here? And I just had to battle against that self out and I just tried really hard. I worked hard. You know, my faith comes into it because I truly believe that I'm protected. There is a plan for me and that all I have to do is try my best and everything else will work out. That's what I believe in. And it did. So with York, I think someone was looking after me and trying to really correct that, in a dialogue that I had with that careers advisor and every single person that told me that I wasn't good enough or that I don't deserve to be here because I ended up getting the highest academic grade three years in a row at York. And I graduated top of my year. and I think that that moment was just the seal on all of that negativity of the past that actually I am smart enough to be here I do deserve to be here and I can accomplish great things at York I was told about well actually I can phase in when becoming a barrister was you know on my radar because growing up I didn't know what a barrister was and there's that that cliche of barrister/barista and I honestly did not know the difference and obviously I knew I knew about lawyers things but I didn't know about the bar and how I came across that was in my first year of university I randomly signed up to become a witness in just this you know the advocacy training process they do for barristers to just refresh their skills like CDP and I was playing this witness who couldn't see very well and I was just acting at this point. And the senior silk who was training the other barristers said to me, you'd be very good at mooting. And I just smiled and nodded and I was like, oh, thank you. And I secretly hoped that mooting was a good thing because I had never heard of it. And I remember afterwards, I came off the stand. And I Googled what is mooting and I realized what it was. And I just threw myself into it because I thought, okay, well, let's give this a chance. Let's try. And as I did that, I discovered more about what being a barrister was because I was actually doing it, these little mock trials and cross-examination pieces and all of those things. And I realized that I really like advocacy. I really like complex legal problems. I was already dealing with that in my degree, sort of the law side of things. But it was the advocacy side of things that really came alive for me. And I felt electric every time I was on my feet. And I felt the idea of representing someone in court and speaking for people and for clients. It was amazing to me and something that I truly believe that I was created to do. I think another part of my passion for advocacy came in a little bit earlier than that because I decided to do something about this Islamophobia problem, to do something about the racism in my little town. I mean, my town has annual marches, which is Bishop Auckland against Islam. And it is a very, very difficult place to grow up in with someone like me to grow up. So I know for a fact that there are more people like me coming into that town and my sister was there, my cousins. And so I wanted to try and make a shift, make a change in the way that I could. And so I contacted my MP, this is again in my first year of uni, and just out of the blue. And one of my lecturers actually helped me put a letter together and that's when it actually gained traction because I had a professor backing me. And I arranged for me to go into primary schools and secondary schools and talk about respect and Islam, just clearing up the misconceptions that the children may have, but also just about backing yourself and having confidence, but also doing so in a way that you are kind and you are uplifting other people, that you don't need to tear each other down because another person is different to. And the change that I saw in these students from when I first walked in and they were judging me because of how I looked to then at the end of the class when I pulled out the scarves and I'm like does anybody want to go and everybody puts their hands up and they're telling me facts about Islam or tell me tell me stuff about Pakistan that I was telling them it was just such an eye-opening experience of well actually maybe I have a skill here that I can I can convince people and change their opinions of me in an eloquent way. And if I can get through to the 10-year-olds, maybe I have a skill to get through to the judges and go further. So yeah, that was sort of the start of becoming a barrister for me in my first year. And then also coincidentally, and I think this is like the true love story in my life, is that I randomly again signed up to an event at Henderson Chambers in my first year of uni after I'd found out a bit more about the bar and I met barristers there and I truly I just liked the sort of friendly vibe I didn't feel like they were inaccessible to me and I think I had this like youthful overconfidence because I didn't know the world and I just went in there thinking that And not having the doubts and the sort of scared feeling that maybe I should have had. I done more research and found out about who I was actually speaking to. I just went in there, smiley, happy, and trying to make conversation with other barristers and people there. And then I did my mini pupillage there in my second year of uni. And again, I loved it. And then from that moment, I was like, Henderson's where I want to be at. And that's where I focused all my attention. After graduating from my undergraduate degree, I got into Oxford to do the BCL. And again, that was another marker for me that I'm pretty smart and I can do this. And during my BCL year, which was a very tough year, it was during COVID. So I got the first year I got to experience the sort of feel of being at Oxford. And then yeah the first term and then the second term and third term it was just locked down so I didn't really get that experience but during Oxford I as a trial run applied for pupillage at Henderson and I got it I got it first round so I said to myself it's a really intense year let's just see it as a trial run let's just see where we go to but it was it it was just meant to be. And that's how I got to Henderson.

Gautam: Well, you know, that's an absolutely sensational. Account you've just given me and given our listeners. And in fact, we could just stop the podcast there now, which we're not going to do, by the way. And that would just be the most inspirational section I think we could ever hear. Thank you hugely for sharing that story. It was very personal. It was very raw. That's what it's all about. And genuinely, you were born to do this. What you've said, Isha, it resonates not just with me, but with so many people. In all those naysayers, and I really hope, and I know the chances are very remote, to say the least, but that careers advisor who tells you to do a beautician's course, I really wish he or she could listen to this podcast and look at you now. I really wish they could because these naysayers, and there are lots of naysayers like this, I had... Trust me, I had a few naysayers in my time, and I'm, of course, a lot older than you, but I remember, and I'll share this with you. I was 17 and doing my A-levels. I'd just done my first year of my A-levels. And as you know, that's when you start to think about what you want to do for a degree. And I wasn't doing law as an A-level because very few people who do law actually do law as an A-level, as you know. And I wanted to consider doing a law degree. And I remember one of these teachers at my sixth form college in Northwest London, where I grew up, said, well, I'm not sure a career in law is for you, and really tried to put me off. And I asked, Well, why not, right? Because when you're a product of immigration, which people like you and I are, and many of us are, those two words should be at the forefront of our mind all the time. Why not? And I was brought up that way by two loving parents. They're both up in the heavens now. But they always taught my sister and I to think, why not? So all those naysayers, I mean, you know, and there are lots of naysayers out there, But well done to you because I'm so proud to hear what you've said that, you know, despite all of that and despite all the prejudice, despite everything, it's like I said in the introduction, you are a real bright star and there are so many people. Who will come up through the system, being inspired by you. And I just loved hearing that. And, you know, let me turn to something then that spins out of that, which is, and you touched on this in your fantastic segment there, but about your heritage. And this is all, you know, that's very important because it makes us who we are. And all those things, family, faith, the example that we get set by our elders and the determination we gain from all of that and the values, not to say the languages that we can all speak as a consequence of that, because I dare say you and I are not just bilingual, we're trilingual. But in terms of all of that, tell us a little bit about, as we celebrate South Asian Heritage Month, why heritage is so important to you and what are some of the big things that it does for you to drive you every day of your life and your career?

Isha: That's a great question. I think who you are and where you come from are so intertwined. And I think that knowing that I have Pakistani heritage, I have, you know, one of the key players in my life was my nana, so my mom's dad. And one would think that you know, because of cultural stereotypes and things like that, he wouldn't be supportive of my career aspirations. But he was the one that was backing me throughout this whole journey. And every time I would call him over the phone, and that's one of the reasons why I know Udu and I know Punjabi, so that I can converse with him growing up. And he would just, you know, he would always check in on how I'm doing, you know, what's the next step? Are you there yet? This support that I got from this, you know, strong man, who was, you know, full of faith and full of light was such an important influence in my life and knowing about his story as well. And he had to, you know, overcome so many challenges in his life to get where he was. And same for my parents and my wider family. We've all had to struggle. We've all had to, you know, put our big pants on and keep going. And the fact that you know my granddad chose to move here I'm so grateful to him for that and I love hearing about his stories about how he only had 20 pounds when he got here didn't know what to do and he found some friends and all of these things I just think that gratitude. For where I come from plays such a big part in who I am today and that is really important and And the skills that it comes with, I can tell you a funny story of me turning up for an emergency injunction in Clerkenwell and Shoreditch County Call. And on the other side were litigants in person who also spoke and they didn't speak any English. And the case was essentially about us as the local authority going in and preparing damp and serious things in the home for their children and they didn't understand what was going on. And so I was there in the hearing and before the hearing translating and being a barrister and achieving the right outcome for both parties. And so on the court record is my Urdu, which is which is quite cool but but i remember there's this is saying to me that you know if i wasn't there with my skills that could that could have gone horribly wrong because there was such a miscommunication between the judge and the parties and so it is a strength and i think anybody who's listening to this that has some difference that has a rich heritage because it is a it is a strength should truly embrace that. And starting off how I did with truly when I was growing, you know, resenting being different and just wanting to fit in and getting penalized for it to this point now where I embrace my difference. I think it's my superpower. I love being Muslim. I love being Pakistani. I love being English. I love it all. And I think that's the stage that every person should get to because we are made up of inspiration people around us and we can draw on their strength and the culture and the beauty of it. I mean, when I go to Pakistan and I eat the food and I wear the colorful clothes and I just feel such an embrace and what a privilege it is to have that side of me and have that beauty as well so it's something to embrace and and that's what heritage means to me.

Gautam: Again very very powerful and again really strongly hits me and will hit so many of our listeners because you know it's something that gives us a lot and it's only when we think about how lucky anyone is who's got a different heritage because we're all very proud to be British I mean I am very proud to be British, and I think it's the greatest country in the world. London's the greatest city in the world. I can go on and on and on. At the same time, I am empowered by the fact that I've got something else I can lean into so much, and my background is so incredibly important to me. And if anything, Isha, my reflections on it are that I probably understood just how important my heritage was as I got a bit older. Because I think it hits you when you get a bit older. It probably hit me when I had that naysayer at sixth form and my mom's words when I came back and told her, because my mom only began working part-time when my sister and I were well-established in school. I remember this conversation so well. I came back, my mom came back and I was at home And I said, I'd had this conversation and my mom's words were, you know, I've always told you why not, right? And you going to prove her wrong, right? And that's the, I can remember that conversation so well. And, you know, and I, so look, what you've said really resonates so strongly with me. And thank you again for being so honest about these issues. And, and, you know, I want to touch on one quick thing before I move into the final section of the podcast, which, and I, and as you may. Know Isha, I always like to end podcasts with more lighthearted conversation about hobbies and pastimes and fun things like that. So we'll come to that in a second. But I want to ask you one other thing that's really important to me, because I love championing women. And I particularly love championing women from an ethnic minority background, because the more advocates and champions that fabulously talented women can have from that background, the better. If you were to give some advice to an aspiring young girl or young lady who's thinking about entering the law and is a bit unsure about it, what little bits of advice would you give that person?

Isha: Another great question. I love this podcast. I think the advice I would give to any young girl is just be brave just be brave you can feel scared you can do it anyway and and dream big. You know you don't need to limit yourself and the true limits that we have in life are the ones that we put on ourselves sorry I'm just getting a bit emotional saying that but it's it's so true and for me when I when I decided I wanted to become a barrister and I was looking at chambers and I didn't see anyone like me in that position, I could have, and I know people have this feeling that there is no place for me there, that I don't belong, that this isn't right for me because no one who looks like me is there. But what I did and I encourage others to do is flip that around and say, well, I'll be the first. They'll look on that website and they'll see that there is a hijabi Muslim Pakistani woman there and and other people can see that of that same background that it is possible and that I can do it and so that's that's what's taken me through my career that yes I'm doing it because I think it's the best job in the world and I love that I love the intellectual complexities the public speaking and all of this but also I'm representing my community. And I'm trying to inspire them to do, as I said, be brave, think big, and just go for it.

Gautam: Wonderful. I mean, absolutely wonderful. And that's how it should be, right? That's how it should be. And I'm a firm believer that the only obstacles in our path are the ones that we allow to be there. We've just got to think, hey, we're here on merit. It's a meritocracy, despite what might happen sometimes and might be said sometimes. Life is and should be a meritocracy and having the pride in being different is good and so thank you so much for sharing those thoughts i mean i was i was really excited at the prospect of doing this podcast with you i'm even more excited having done the podcast with you and as we entered the final bit which is going to be about some fun stuff i'm truly in huge debt to you for being so candid and open and honest and raw about all of these things, because it's how it should be. So let me end on this note, right? You know, you're a busy young lady. You've got a great practice, and it's only getting even greater. You're destined for wonderful things, and one day you will be one of His Majesty's counsel. Of that, I have no doubt. And I shall look forward to that day with huge enthusiasm and keenness, I can assure you, Isha. But tell me this, what sort of hobbies do you have? What's your favorite interests and pastimes when you're not in practice as a barrister?

Isha: Well, thank you so much for your kind words. That means everything coming from you. so my hobbies it might surprise you but I know Thai boxing, Muay Thai. My dad was a Thai boxing instructor and so growing up I think there's footage of me being two years old trying to kick and punch things. Amazing I love it I love hearing that gosh I am surprised that I love it though I love it. So that's something that I do and I still keep up to this day you know I just think women should know how to defend themselves with one and number two it's such a good outlet for any of the tangled of emotions that we as human beings have right and so yeah that's that's something I do I also horse ride which is something that I love doing it's my happy place and I've been a horse riding since I was pretty much seven years old and that was something I was worried about actually moving from County Durham to London was whether I could keep it up or not because it's a bit more difficult to access, and because I was quite an experienced rider I didn't want to do lessons and things like that but just I'm so grateful because I found someone who has horses that she lets me ride them and train them up for her, So my weekends are spent going through forests, galloping through fallout forests. And I'm just in this sort of serene world of not thinking about law, not thinking about who I am and all the struggles that I have, but just thinking about how beautiful nature is and my connection that I have with horses. So that's another outlet for me. And then aside from those things, my faith, every day I'm trying to get better and being a good human being and becoming more grateful and giving out more and being more kind and so that's another I would say interest that I have too

Gautam: Well an amazing end to an amazing podcast with an amazing guest thank you so much for being such a wonderful guest I mean I I've genuinely loved doing this a podcast with you as someone who's done a few podcasts I've And I've been very fortunate to have spoken to many, many wonderful people. You truly are very much at the top of the tree. And I'm very grateful to you for being who you are and doing what you do, being the example that you are, striving to do such great things as you do, to be a great person, to be a great lawyer, because you can be both. You can certainly do both at the same time. And I'm also inspired by the fact that you're a martial artist, because I think, I mean, I generally mean this as we end this podcast. I think some of the most talented people in the world are mixed martial artists because you've got to be specialists in a number of disciplines and be very disciplined mentally and be very fit and be so resilient. And so, you know, it's one of like, I could carry on talking with you for ages, but I'll save that for when we meet in person. So let me say this again. And thank you so much, Isha, for being one of our podcast guests for this mini-series to celebrate South Asian Heritage Month 2025 and for being such a superb guest. So thank you and see you very soon, I hope.

Outro: Arbitral Insights is a Reed Smith production. Our producers are Ali McCardell and Shannon Ryan. For more information about Reed Smith's global international arbitration practice, email [email protected]. To learn about the Reed Smith Arbitration Pricing Calculator, a first-of-its-kind mobile app that forecasts the cost of arbitration around the world, search Arbitration Pricing Calculator on reedsmith.com or download for free through the Apple and Google Play app stores. You can find our podcast on podcast streaming platforms, reedsmith.com, and our social media accounts at Read Smith LLP. 

Disclaimer: This podcast is provided for educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice and is not intended to establish an attorney-client relationship, nor is it intended to suggest or establish standards of care applicable to particular or lawyers in any given situation. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Any views, opinions, or comments made by any external guest speaker. 

All rights reserved.

Transcript is auto-generated.

Reed Smith lawyers Mahmuda Kamalee, Ravi Pattani and Akshay Sevak join host and international arbitration partner, Gautam Bhattacharyya, for a special episode to kick off this year’s SAHM celebrations. In this reflective conversation, our speakers share the inspirations that have shaped their careers and lives, lessons passed down through generations, the best advice they have received (to date!) and what heritage means to them.

----more----

Transcript:

Intro: Welcome to Arbitral Insights, a podcast series brought to you by our international arbitration practice lawyers here at Reed Smith. I'm Peter Rosher, Global Head of Reed Smith's International Arbitration Practice. I hope you enjoy the industry commentary, insights and anecdotes we share with you in the course of this series, wherever in the world you are. If you have any questions about any of the topics discussed, please do contact our speakers. And with that, let's get started. 

Gautam: Hello everyone and welcome to the first of our Reed Smith podcasts to celebrate South Asian Heritage Month 2025. This year the theme of South Asian Heritage Month is Roots for Roots. And I'm delighted to say that for this episode I've got three of my very dear colleagues at Reed Smith as our guests. I'm going to briefly introduce them to you. And then by the end of this podcast, once you've heard them speak to the questions I will be putting to them, you'll realize what fabulous people they are, let alone what brilliant lawyers they are. So first of all, I will introduce Mahmuda Kamalee, Mahmooda is a newly qualified associate in the Global Commercial Disputes Group in London. and she is doing a broad range of work in a number of areas in that practice. Secondly, I will introduce Akshay Sevak, who is another associate in the Global Commercial Disputes Group in London. He too does a broad mix of work and he is, at the time that we're doing this podcast, he's halfway through his Higher Rights of Audience course. So by the time this podcast goes out, I'm sure he'll have a further set of titles to put after his email block when he sends you all emails. Last and definitely not least is my partner, Ravi Pattani, who is a partner in our corporate group doing a broad mix of corporate transactional work and is definitely one of the future leaders of that corporate practice. So delighted to see you all and have you all here. I'm looking forward to our discussion, and I don't want any of you to hold back, okay? So I want you just to let it flow and tell me exactly what you think about the questions I'm going to ask you, because you are some of the shining lights in our practice of South Asian heritage. So let me go straight into it and ask the first question, and I'm going to ask each of you this question. I'm not going to ask you all the same questions, but I'm going to ask you all a few of the same questions. The first thing I think is always interesting, because I know I've been asked this question so many times in the course of my career so far. Why did you choose law as a career? So maybe I start off with Mahmuda on that, please.

Mahmuda: Thank you, Gautam, for the lovely introduction. And I'm really pleased to be here with you all today. If I'm very honest, I can't actually remember a particular reason as to why I chose a legal career. And I know as a lawyer, we can shy away from saying that because there should be multiple reasons why we chose it. But I think my earliest memory of wanting to become a lawyer was when I was around 14 or 15 years old. And I recall we had a careers day at school where we were learning of the different roles and jobs in society that we could take on. And I was introduced to the idea of a judge, a solicitor and a barrister. And I just remember leaving curious as to what their roles were and the way in which their roles enabled them to achieve justice in different respects. And then from there on, I decided to research as I grew older into different work experience opportunities at law firms. I attended legal clinics and I attended other events for other jobs to see whether sort of my curiosity in law was shifted at all. And I'm really pleased today to say it wasn't. And all of these experiences enabled me to see how impactful legal work can be, both in a courtroom, but also in everyday lives. So this continued to reaffirm my interest in the field. If I look at it from a more academic perspective, I've always been interested in analytical thinking and subjects which emphasise written skills. So naturally, law stood out to me as a discipline, which combined these elements. And I particularly enjoyed doing a law degree. And like I said, the analytical thinking and the emphasis on written skills was the motivation behind choosing to study law at undergraduate level. And then I proceeded to seek a training contract at Reed Smith, which I was very lucky to get. And now here I am today as part of your wonderful team, having the opportunity to work with yourself.

Gautam: Well, thank you, my Mahmuda. Well, you know, I can certainly say that I've been a witness to your analytical skills and your drafting skills. So I'm very glad you made that choice. And I'm very glad that your curiosity was really brought about because we've got you. So thank you. So let me ask that same question to you, Akshay, please.

Akshay: Thanks, Gautam, and thanks for having me on this podcast. I don't mean it in any small way when I say it's a real honor and it's a real privilege to be able to share the stage with yourself, Mahmood and Ravi. So I think mine was, my reasons were a lot less structured than Mahmuda’s. I actually, so I grew up in Kenya and my plan, to be honest, when I was 16 was, when I look back at it, I was very much trying to become a professional pianist. I was going to go to music school and And then I decided when I was 16 that I didn't have the maturity to understand music in the way that you needed to do that. Certainly not at that age. And I thought, well, what else do I like doing? And I like talking, which is why I'm here. I liked the analytical subjects like history, English. I liked physics and maths quite a lot, the detail in that. And someone said, well, why don't you consider studying law? And I thought, well, I am coming from abroad. I probably should do something relatively rigorous to justify the endeavor to my family. So I came to law school and I just, I was so great because everyone was so, so smart. The work was really difficult. It was really interesting. And I just didn't appreciate until I started studying it that you really can sort of grasp and really grapple with so many different facets of life through this one medium. So when I was at law school, similar to Mahmoodo, I applied for vacation schemes and training contracts. I was so fortunate to land one at Reed Smith. And even to be honest, as my training contract completed, I really did think that it was time now to go back home. And there was no intention to stay on. And so when the department I'm now in, Gotham, your team, the Global Commercial Disputes team, offered me a job to stay on, And it was just very, very good luck. And so here I am now.

Gautam: Well, thank you, Akshay. And I mean, I know you still play the piano very well. But I'm also very glad that you chose law over the piano. And I'm also glad that you made London your home. So that's very good. Thank you. Okay, last but not least, I'd like to ask you, Ravi, the same question. So what brought you into the law in the first place?

Ravi: Thanks good to be here I wish I could say that I was like Mahmuda or Akshay and really thought about the career choice I was going to make and thought about my skill set and how that would complement the law but I was probably about 12 or 13 watching TV and seeing all these high-powered lawyers and suits and fancy offices and fancy cities around the world I thought oh that sounds like fun and I kind of just stuck to it and had no imagination to go for anything different to what what I thought I wanted to do back when I was a 12-year-old watching TV. I come from a South Asian heritage, like all of us here, and despite the regular view of your parents want you to be a lawyer or a doctor, my parents were very much against me being a lawyer and wanted me to be either a doctor, a dentist, a pharmacist, anything in the sciences. And so actually when they said, no, don't do law, it was actually almost like a weird rebellion. Given that it's law, It's quite a sensible rebellion, but it was a slight rebellion. And so I kind of just wanted to get into the career. And like Mahmuda and Akshay, and actually I did study law as an undergraduate, I actually didn't enjoy the undergraduate degree, so much so that I kind of didn't really put a lot of effort into thinking about my career and applying for roles and doing the vacation schemes. But thankfully, I had really good friends around me who encouraged me to apply for a vacation scheme. I applied to Reed Smith and the rest, as they say, is history.

Gautam: Well, I am very grateful to those friends of yours who gave you that nudge, really. Because in life, we all need a nudge now and again, right? You know, since we all share that South Asian heritage, as you said, it is interesting that point you made about how, you know, we study things, but there's a sort of perception of what we might want to do, what people think we ought to do. And sort of just finding our own way is so important. And I want to pick up on that theme with you all, actually, and ask me the next question. And this, again, is going to be directed to all of you. What's the best bit of advice that someone has given you so far in the course of your career? Is there something you can particularly remember that made a real impact on you that's helped you and guided you to drive forward in what you do. And maybe I can start with Akshay on that one first, please.

Akshay: Thanks, Gautam. I think, so not to embarrass you, but I think you've definitely given me quite a lot of very useful and great advice in my career. I think some of the most useful things that I've really, really held on to when we've spoken has been that you've got to keep things simple. There is no monopoly on wisdom. And those two things have been real, real confidence boosters to back, to feel, for me to feel like I can back myself with ideas, with also, with trying out different things. I think the advice I got from my parents and from my grandfather was, in turn, just take it a step at a time, which is probably an iteration of keeping it simple as well. But I just didn't appreciate how profound that was at the time. And from my granddad, just always be bold. And perhaps we'll touch on this later, but I don't know any, quote unquote, relaxed or timid South Asian people, certainly not in my family. And I found that skill to be incredibly useful in a career in the law, perhaps in litigation as well.

Gautam: Yeah, very true. I think, yeah, I mean, having that ability to stand up to things, you know, cleanly is very valuable. Well, thank you, Akshay. Why don't I turn next to Ravi, if you can perhaps share with our listeners something about some of the advice you've got and why it made an impact on you?

Ravi: I think for me, it was your opinion matters, your opinion is valid. Like a lot of people, I think I have suffered and do suffer from imposter syndrome you you enter this big city law firm and especially when i joined thankfully it's improving and has been improving I’m sure since your time Gautam but there wasn't a lot of people who who looked like me not necessarily even at my level but in kind of in the senior roles and and you start to think oh or should i be bringing this viewpoint into this conversation should i be raising my opinion and having not really worked in a city environment or an office environment I was kind of nervous or skeptical about doing that and I remember someone saying to me no no your value your opinion is valid your opinion is important and you need to raise it and I'm not saying that it was an overnight journey for me it took me a while to feel comfortable to do that but it was the thing that I think really helped propel my career that I felt empowered to to join conversations with senior stakeholders with clients and not be worried about expressing a view expressing an opinion even if it was counter to to the senior partners I was working with because sometimes my viewpoint made them think of things in a different way and and helped our client achieve the results that they were looking for so that for me was a real big one and it's something that I still sometimes struggle with today and I'm still working on but it's also the one that I hope that I will be able to impart on other people that no matter where you come from no matter what kind of level you are or what stage you are in your career. Speak up and in a respectful way, make sure your voice is heard and it can make a big difference even at a very junior level.

Gautam: Thanks, Ravi. I couldn't agree more. And I think that's really an impactful thing. And keep, please, expressing your views. Keep speaking up because it's really important. It's so valuable when people share their inputs and thoughts. And Akshay said there is no monopoly on wisdom. And we're all better for sharing thoughts, for ensuring that everyone has a say, because no one can say, I've got the right answer on everything. And people see things in different ways. I know I learn every day from people I work with, my great colleagues I work with. I learn every day. The day I stop learning is when I'm going to hang up my legal boots, because we've got to keep learning. So, no, thank you, Ravi. Thank you, Akshay, so far for that. Let me turn to you Mahmuda and ask you the same question about some of the best advice you've got and why it's had an impact on you.

Mahmuda: Thanks Gautam and thanks Ravi and Akshay for sharing your advice as well which I think was really empowering. I can resonate with Ravi on the imposter syndrome as a South Asian Muslim woman who looks different from the general crowd. I must admit I do suffer from heightened imposter syndrome and I'm not sure if the person on this call remembers what they said to me but Gautam interviewed me in 2018 when I was when I had just finished my first year of my law degree and he was interviewing me for the placement year which Reed Smith did in collaboration with my university Queen Mary and I remember finishing the interview and I was an absolute wreck I might have not shown it at the time but I was so nervous I was thinking why would they choose me. Someone who looks different might speak different and doesn't have the sort of traditional backing to becoming a successful lawyer, what I thought was necessary to become a successful lawyer. And I remember leaving Gautam in the lift. I was heading down to leave the building and he was heading back to the floor. And what he said to me was, you are a butterfly whose wings are learning to fly. Do not allow anyone to clip them and do not allow yourself to click them. And while it might not be traditionally a piece of advice, I just remember that statement sticking with me to the point that now, like, seven years later, I still remember that. And I left feeling that day that no matter what the outcome is of that interview, I won't allow anyone to click my wings. Whether they see my worth now, they may see it later. And that really stuck with me. And it allowed me to manage my imposter syndrome so much more better because that serves as a reminder to all of us that actually sometimes we might be our biggest critic. Other people might see our worth, but because we're overthinking so much, we end up sort of making the situation far worse than it is. And that could mean that we lose out on opportunities. So thank you, Gautam, for saying that to me back then in 2018. Yeah, first year law student Mahmuda really appreciates it. And actually NQ Mahmuda appreciates it even more now because I thought life was hard back then. But actually, it just gets tougher. But it's thanks to seniors like yourself who have enabled us and empowered us to continue.

Gautam: Well, that's very kind of you. But I mean, the real superstar of that whole event was you. And, you know, it shows, right? Look where you are today. Just look at you now. And that's the wonderful thing. And I tell you, just going off-piste for a while to share with the three of you and our listeners, one of the great things that I look back on, you know, I've been in practice now for almost 35 years. And one of the great things that I love to see is to see young talent blossom. And I've seen many a nervous person like you, Mahmuda, who, you know, and you were really, really good. I still remember that interview, by the way, and I still remember our conversation, just for the record. I just love seeing people do well, and I think the role of more senior people is to enable that and empower that and make sure that lawyers like you, Akshay, and Ravi don't just equal people like me, but you surpass me. Because that's what passing the baton is all about. And that gives me a lot of satisfaction and happiness. So, no, no, I love it. I mean, look, I think the world of all three of you, and it's evident from the first video of this podcast, just how brilliant you are anyway. So our listeners will work that out for themselves. I should avoid more commentary. But, you know, let me ask you this. I was going to ask you a bit about why Ravi chose corporate and why you, Akshay, and Mahmuda chose disputes. But I think we've really learned so much about you anyway in the course of our first part of our discussion. But I want to ask you this, if I may. And this is all about heritage, right? We're doing this podcast about South Asian Heritage Month. And of course, Ravi's a great corporate lawyer. Akshay and Mahmuda, you do disputes work, litigation, arbitration, investigations, etc. But one of the things that we all know is that our heritage is really important. And there are many more people who will come after us and who will do well and who will look to us and think, yeah, well, if they can do it, I can as well. Heritage has many aspects to it. But I wonder, given the whole subject of heritage, I wonder if I could ask you to say what heritage means to you and why it empowers you. And actually, I think this is a question that's worth asking of all of you because we're moving on the questions. But I think, you know, why don't I go to Ravi first on that? Why is heritage so important to you and how does it empower you and make you better at what you do every day in your practice?

Ravi: I think for me heritage is not just about people coming next it's about the people who have come before me who've kind of fought the fight trolling that path not just in the legal career but i look personally at my my family they like many south asian gujaratis they my family came via uganda so they were there in the 1970s and then moved over here and you know they had a very settled happy life back in Uganda. They were uprooted and moved to the UK in the 70s and rebuilt their lives. And for them, it was about making their next generation's lives better, the focus on education, the focus on career and building a comfortable life for yourselves. And I'd be very grateful for my family for putting those kind of values in me, instilling those values in me. And that's what kind of helped drive me to where I am now. And I also... And that's kind of the more serious point of it. But also I grew up in a nice bustling, big Asian family with people in and out of our house every day. And we had to learn to one multitask and balance our work with hosting people in the home and also making conversations with people that I'd never met before and all of these kind of life skills, which at the time you don't really appreciate how important they're going to be. And all of those things have been so valuable for me in my career. So as a corporate lawyer, we are working on multiple deals at one time. We have to be able to balance our work. We have to be able to balance our work and our lives. We have to be able to balance the various different competing tasks for clients. And all those skills, which I didn't really appreciate or kind of hadn't understood I was learning, have come to the fore. My ability to make conversation with anyone. I mean, I think all of you will be testament to this. I can pretty much talk to anyone at any time and I will talk to anyone at any time. And that all comes from the roots that I've been given, my heritage. And that's hopefully helped me to kind of make those connections with my colleagues, with my friends in the firm, but also with clients. And that's hopefully going to be the route for me to continue to build my practice and to demonstrate that actually all those things that you take for granted as a young child or the things that you think of as challenges that are different to other people who are growing up around you are really valuable things and they are the things that set you apart and they are the things that will help you identify skills in yourself that you didn't even realize that you had.

Gautam: Thank you, Ravi. That was fabulous. Can I ask Akshay to share your thoughts, please?

Akshay: Thanks, Gautam. Yeah, no, thanks, Ravi. Really, thank you so much for sharing. Ravi and I have something in common in that we're both Gujaratis and we both have family who came from Uganda. And what I thought was really interesting from the answer Ravi gave is that he said his family were uprooted from Uganda. They had a comfortable life and then they rebuilt here. But he doesn't use the word that was used to describe them at the time, which is refugee. And I think that's quite telling. And I think it leads into my answer. Because I think that there are so many, it would have been so easy for people coming over them to let their circumstance better them. And I think that permeates the language we talk about it today. And we speak now about how everyone of the South Asian heritage and other heritage as well, to be honest, have come here and rebuilt their lives and made something for themselves. And I think that just taking a moment to pause and recognize how significant an endeavor that was, for me, is an empowering act in and of itself. It says to me, certainly... You are from stock that is very well tested. And you've got it in you to really go the distance if you want to and if you put your mind to it, because others before you have done that and much, much, much more. So I think that for me, heritage means honoring those who have come before, really just recognizing the awesome power and grandeur of what they, in relatively or seemingly normal lives, how they have achieved the extraordinary. And I think it's also, heritage also means to me recognizing how beautiful it is to have something which is slightly different about you. What a privilege. We all get 24 hours a day in a set number of years on the clock, which you can't change. And you get yours added with extra masala and spice as well as everything else that you gain in this country. I mean, it's extraordinary privilege. So I think for me, I just wouldn't feel, life for me just wouldn't be as fun. If I didn't have a recognition of that heritage. And I think that if I'm doing anything right, then it's by standing on the shoulders of very, very many people in my community and in my family. And hopefully someone will be able to stand on mine too.

Gautam: Fabulous. Thank you, Akshay. I'll save some thoughts until after I've heard Mahmuda, because what you've both said so far really resonates with me too. Mahmuda, share your thoughts, please, on that.

Mahmuda: Well, firstly, I want to say, Akshay, you said masala and spice, and all I could think of was karak chai, and I wish we had some right with us now.

Gautam: Well, as if by magic, I'll get some to you, don't worry.

Mahmuda: That would be amazing but I think for me Akshay hit it right on the head our heritage and being different is a strength and it brings a different level of fun to our lives if I if I can call it fun for me being different is a strength for those who know me the first thing I always say to everyone well the first thing my family introduced me to everyone is by saying I'm a lawyer but for myself it's always saying hi I'm a British Bangladeshi Muslim and I take a lot of pride in stating that and stating that I'm different. And it's not always been the case. However, I can say that it's now a core part of who I am. And without my heritage, I can't even imagine who I would be or the life that I would have. For some context, my mother came to this country when she was about 14 years old from Bangladesh. And I'll use a lovely term that Ravi said, uprooted from Bangladesh to start a new life here. And whilst they came for a better life, it wasn't always so easy. And my maternal grandfather, who is still around and who I'm so grateful for, he always shares the stories with us of how he had to come to this country first to establish himself before bringing over his wife and his kids and how that distance just reminds him of how important family is and the fact that if he hadn't maintained that distance and tried to establish his life here first of all my mother wouldn't have come here and if she didn't come here I wouldn't be here and have the journey that I've had to date so I think my heritage is really important to me it's a reminder of not only the impact that I will have going forward but also a reminder that I should be grateful for those who came before me and what they've done for us. My heritage has shaped my professional life in multiple ways. And I guess the key skills and values that I've learned from being a South Asian woman is values like community. Like Ravi said, the household was hustling and bustling with guests at any hour, lots of food to go around the table and lots of conversations. So communication was one of the key skills that I picked up on. Also, I learned empathy, emotional intelligence, which I think we might not know as a key skill and value that a lawyer should have, but I think it's enabled me to better understand my clients, to think about the emotions that a client goes through, that a firm goes through when we're strategizing as to how to help them best. And like I mentioned, my grandfather came, he uprooted himself to this country and he spent a good few years without his family, without having much contact with them and without having much resource to build a life for them. He taught me perseverance and resilience. And those are two attributes that I hold very closely to myself. And I think without that, I wouldn't be the lawyer that I am. So my heritage, my upbringing have allowed me to appreciate that difference is not always negative. And I've got a deep appreciation and I'm really proud of being different, whether this is my language, my religion, my way of living, or even the way I dress. I take pride in being different. And I think it helps me to stick out in the crowd in a positive way.

Gautam: You know, you three are just sensational. Thank you, Mahmuda. You know, you've said so many brilliant things and I know that our listeners will resonate because these are your personal stories. And they also hit very much the Roots to Roots theme of this year, South Asian Heritage Month. And everything you've said just really resonates with me so hard because, you know, my parents came to this country. It was the first time they'd ever been abroad, right? They came to this country and they enabled my sister and me to have opportunities. And I will always be eternally grateful to my late parents for that. And the routes that they took to come here and lay down routes meant that they were very keen for us, even though we were outsiders, and we will always…. Unfortunately, some people will always regard us as outsiders. We were able to lay down roots, integrate, and learn all those lessons that all three of you, rather, have so eloquently spoken to. And the fact is, all four of us speak more than one language, right? Now, very few people would be able to be brought up bilingual or trilingual, or even speak more languages than that. But we're all able to say that we have had that privilege and we do have that privilege and different is good. And that's a theme of what you've all said. And I think that is, for me, that really summarizes so much of what we're talking about. So thank you so much for your fabulous, candid thoughts, thoughtful points you've all made about it. And, you know, very fitting that we talk about all of this as we celebrate South Asian Heritage Month. So I'm very grateful to you all. We're now approaching the end of our podcast, but for those of our listeners who have heard podcasts that I've done before, I always like to end our podcasts with some more lighthearted conversation, totally unrelated to the subject matter of the actual a podcast, and this one is no different. So I'm going to ask each of you a separate question and love your thoughts. I'm going to start with Mahmuda first, because I know, apart from your incredible prowess as a lawyer and your effervescent nature, you're also a real foodie. So tell us what food means to you and what sorts of food we're talking about.

Mahmuda: Thanks, Gautam. If there's one thing I can say about food, if I'm equally passionate about something as much as I am about law, it's food. And not just because of the fact that I just really enjoy eating. I think food, especially in our shared heritage of being South Asian, just I saw food as a way of bringing people together. I saw food as a way of showing affection, showing appreciation. And food was a way that I regarded my mother's efforts. She might say that she couldn't do much for us and she says that often she she wasn't educated to the level that we all have been privileged to be educated at and the one thing I say to her was you provided us with food and food is the fuel for everything and anything and without that delicious food I wouldn't be the strong woman that I am today so that's that side of it but aside from that I have to say I've always been conflicted between what my favorite food is the British side of me always says well it has to be it has to be a good roast a good roast dinner like that's my absolute favorite and when Christmas time comes and we have all of these lunches and dinners at work I'm just so looking forward to the roast dinner but I've got to give it to my heritage nothing beats South Asian food and we're all going to be biased on this call nothing beats it for me it's a good biryani just the layers sauces like actually said the spices the masala nothing tingles my taste buds more than a biryani and just to put it out there if anyone wants to bribe me with something, it's going to be that biryani because I can't say no to that biryani. So I'll work late all night for you. Just give me a biryani.

Gautam: You shouldn't have said that now because now everyone's going to be getting you biryanis every day of the week. But no, thank you.

Mahmuda: I don't mind. I don't mind at all.

Gautam: Yeah, yeah, yeah. No, I love it. I love it. I love it. Thank you. I'm going to turn to Ravi next, if I may, and we'll close out with Akshay. I want to ask you a different question, Ravi. Is there a particular sort of music you like, and do you have a favorite album?

Ravi: I have a very eclectic musical taste, so I would like everything from, you know, the cheesy, hot top 40 to a bit of indie rock to obviously some Bollywood and a bit of pangra. But I'd say my go-to comfort music kind of goes back to the noughties garage R&B scene, which would always be my go-to music. I recently went back to leicester where i grew up and Craig David was performing and it reminded me of so many youthful nights out and enjoying a lot of time with my friends and family at the time and so going to my favorite album i feel like Craig Davids first album born to do it was just such a pivotal uh kind of time in my life and that album will always be one that's uh close to my heart and i'll always remember and i will always dance along to and sing along too but i hate karaoke so you'll never hear me it's just in the shower for me.

Gautam: Well next time I get you in the karaoke I’m gonna ask them to do either Rewind or Seven Days or or i might even find another track you know there's a few tracks why Craig David from his early days which i'm sure you can do really well but look thank you for that it's a great one i i love it i love it i've learned something new about you now from that that's brilliant right now last and definitely not least Akshay i'm going to ask you this question leaving aside the UK have you got a favorite holiday destination that you just love going to or and i'll give you a choice or that you've not yet been to but you'd love to go?

Akshay: It's a tough it's a tough one it's definitely a tough one i'd be i'd be remiss without mentioning Kenya. I know it's not a holiday destination because I grew up there, but it really is God's own country. It's not in Yorkshire. It really is in Kenya. But I think the best travel destination I visited by a country mile has to be Sri Lanka. It was such a beautiful island. And I think it's a fascinating combination of the Buddhist culture, the Hindu culture in the north. It's an island that's small enough that you can go around the entire thing. Multiple times if you wanted to. The transport's great. The people are so friendly. It's beautiful. I visited after I qualified as a lawyer, and I spent just under a month traveling around there. And after a while, I must have been coming across as a little too comfortable, because people started assuming that I was Sri Lankan, which I exploited, that's for sure. And then one day, someone pulled up on the road and asked me in Sinhala for instructions. And I just pointed straight and they just said nice one and continued on and that's when I knew that I'm going to have to come back here either to apologize to this person or to see other parts of this wonderful country so to anyone listening to this Sri Lanka if you haven't been make sure you go.

Gautam: Brilliant. Thank you. I'm sure it was the right direction, by the way. But listen, thank you very much. That brings us to the end of our podcast. I'm very grateful to you all. So thank you, Mahmuda. Thank you, Akshay. Thank you, Ravi, for not just sharing your thoughts today and being so fun and candid, but also being so thoughtful about all of the issues we've spoken about, and particularly on heritage. And a big thank you for being such great colleagues. The one thing about working in a law firm and the practice of law is it's hugely assisted by having brilliant colleagues to work with. And having people like you and seeing people like you do well and blossom and flourish makes me really happy. So thank you all very much. And I look forward to seeing you all very, very soon.

Outro: Arbitral Insights is a Reed Smith production. Our producers are Ali McCardell and Shannon Ryan. For more information about Reed Smith's global international arbitration practice, email [email protected]. To learn about the Reed Smith Arbitration Pricing Calculator, a first-of-its-kind mobile app that forecasts the cost of arbitration around the world, search Arbitration Pricing Calculator on reedsmith.com or download for free through the Apple and Google Play app stores. You can find our podcast on podcast streaming platforms, reedsmith.com, and our social media accounts at Read Smith LLP. 

Disclaimer: This podcast is provided for educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice and is not intended to establish an attorney-client relationship, nor is it intended to suggest or establish standards of care applicable to particular or lawyers in any given situation. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Any views, opinions, or comments made by any external guest speaker. 

All rights reserved.

Transcript is auto-generated.

Discover the key features of Cambodia's arbitration regime with Joyce Fong and guest speaker Guillaume Massin from DFDL. This episode delves into the practicalities of Cambodia-related arbitrations, including the role of Cambodian courts in supporting arbitral proceedings, the process for enforcing foreign awards, and the most common grounds for challenge. Tune in to hear about the latest trends shaping Cambodia-related arbitrations, along with practical advice for practitioners navigating this dynamic jurisdiction.

----more----

Transcript:

Intro: Welcome to Arbitral Insights, a podcast series brought to you by our international arbitration practice lawyers here at Reed Smith. I'm Peter Rosher, Global Head of Reed Smith's International Arbitration Practice. I hope you enjoy the industry commentary, insights and anecdotes we share with you in the course of this series, wherever in the world you are. If you have any questions about any of the topics discussed, please do contact our speakers. And with that, let's get started. 

Joyce: Welcome to the latest episode of our Arbitral Insights podcast series. I'm delighted to have Guillaume Massin as my guest today to share with us some Arbitral Insights from Cambodia. Guillaume is the head of the European desk of DFDL. He was previously managing director of DFDL's offices in Thailand and Cambodia, and he's currently a partner in the dispute resolution team. Guillaume has been based in Southeast Asia for almost 20 years, and he has extensive experience in facilitating foreign direct investment into the region. Good afternoon, Guillaume. Thank you for joining me on this podcast today. 

Guillaume: Thank you, Joyce, and thanks to Reed Smith for organizing this very interesting session. We're really delighted to be part of this podcast program that covers not only Cambodia, but the entire region where we operate. and I'm happy to be in touch with you, and I'll make this as interesting, as informative as possible. 

Joyce: Well, I'm looking forward to our discussion already. To kick us off, why don't you give us an overview of the arbitration landscape in Cambodia? Are there separate legislations for domestic and foreign arbitrations? 

Guillaume: Sure. Well, everything started in Cambodia in years 2000, 2005. Cambodia has been quite open, tried to be quite open to foreign investment, and as part of that, tried to make arbitration as a way to protect investment in Cambodia. So we have a 2006 law on commercial arbitration, which actually covered the implementation of the New York Convention. We also have the 2007 Code of Civil Procedures, which also provides key, covers the key aspects of the enforcement of arbitral award. So it's basically, for international awards, it would be more the 2006 Law on Commercial Arbitration, and for domestic arbitration, it would be more the 2007 Code of Civil Procedures that would be the key legislation. In terms of the model, Cambodia has been relying on UNCITRAL, so Cambodia is a party to the New York Convention. From 2009, Cambodia has taken steps to create its own arbitration center. And that was modeled, including for the rules of the National Commercial Arbitration Center of Cambodia. It was modeled after the SIAC rules, so directly linked to the UNCITRAL model for that matter. 

Joyce: That's really helpful to know. I hadn't realized that the SIAC assisted with drafting the institutional rules for the National Commercial Arbitration Centre. Since arbitration is relatively new in Cambodia, how is it perceived by the local business community? Do you often see arbitration agreements in contracts? 

Guillaume: So where are foreign parties involved? Yes, most likely there would be an arbitration agreement. There are still some matters where there could be skepticism from local parties about arbitration, or some matters where enforcement would be more difficult with arbitration, including for enforcement of securities, for instance. But generally, arbitration is well accepted in Cambodia. You're right to say that it's fairly recent. In fact, the arbitration center in Cambodia has been up and running. There have been several intakes and developments with new promotions of arbitrators for the past 10, 15 years. So it's been really part of the picture and really open to the business community, let's say, practically speaking, since 2014, 2015. So we have maybe a 10-year track record, and we see that it's more and more used, including for domestic arbitration. 

Joyce: Yeah, what you've just described is consistent with the position in many developing countries, as you know, it takes time and effort to educate not just the lawyers, but and arguably more importantly, the contracting parties and judiciary about arbitration and its benefits. Even what we've just discussed, is it common for parties to nominate Phnom Penh as the state of arbitration? And when might parties do that? And what are the advantages of selecting Phnom Penh over, say, Singapore or Kuala Lumpur? 

Guillaume: So, indeed, the arbitration in Cambodia, as we said earlier, is administered by the National Commercial Arbitration Centre. And it is generally perceived as being, again, when a foreign party is involved, depending on the type of transaction, but as being a process that is more straightforward and cost-effective, including compared to cost-related to court proceedings. As for the choice of seat of arbitration, it would also depend on whether there's a local party involved in the proceedings, depending also on whether assets would be located in Cambodia. But of course, as you can expect, domestic arbitration is usually cheaper than the international arbitration. And for that matter, it's quite clear that there could be a preference also for local parties in Cambodia to choose Phnom Penh as the seat of arbitration. 

Joyce: For foreign parties, at least, one of the factors which determine C's attractiveness is the local court's willingness to uphold and support the arbitration process. Now, would you describe the Cambodian courts as being generally pro-arbitration? 

Guillaume: In practice, courts would tend to be willing to keep the proceedings locally within the courts. But once arbitration proceedings start, or once there's an arbitration agreement that is raised in a dispute, the court would generally favor arbitration. There is still an option if both parties still agree to go to court instead of arbitration, they can still elect to do so even after the dispute has started. But generally, again, the courts would recognize arbitration as a valid process. 

Joyce: That's really positive to hear that the Cambodian courts respect the autonomy of parties to enter into arbitration agreements. On a slightly related note, can Cambodian courts issue orders such as injunctions or asset preservation orders in support of both domestic and local arbitrations? 

Guillaume: Yes, to be clear, both local courts and our arbitration tribunal can issue injunctions. It could be done also through the local arbitration center. And indeed, it's quite frequent that a case would start with preservative relief being sought locally in Cambodia through court proceedings and then referred to arbitration as a main case. The courts would actually recognize that process. There is always a risk that because you start with the courts in Cambodia, then it can continue with the courts. But if one party really makes clear that the entire dispute should be referred to arbitration, then arbitration will kick in at some point. 

Joyce: Okay. Yeah. I think it's really good to understand that the Cambodian courts really respect the party's decision to arbitrate. So if I may, let's now move on to another hot topic, enforcement. How long does it normally take to seek recognition and enforcement of foreign awards in Cambodia, and what might this process look like? 

Guillaume: Well, as we said, Cambodia is a party to the New York Convention, so it would enforce arbitral awards within re-examining the merits of the case. In practice, recognition and enforcement could take from six months to, let's say, two or three years. That would be depending whether all legal avenues to potentially appeal have been exhausted. Because once you get in the recognition phase, so you go straight to the recognition enforcement by the Court of Appeal in Cambodia, but then there could be a further appeal. And in certain instances, it could go to retrial, so back and forth between the Appeal Court and the Supreme Court. And this is where it might take longer. That being said, we see that in many instances, awards are voluntarily executed at some stage, and also may involve a settlement. 

Joyce: So just to be clear, you mentioned earlier that recognition and enforcement proceedings can take from six months to two or three years if all legal avenues to appeal are exhausted. Are you saying that, assuming that a party who doesn't want to pay attempts to appeal, it takes up to three years, and within three years, parties would get closure on whether or not the award would be enforced, or are you saying that two to three years at the first instance, and then you get more time to appeal to the Supreme Court after that? 

Guillaume: No, it would be, in fact, the first instance would be usually about six months as we voted. Then there might be some public order grounds that can be raised, including by a local party. We try to delay the implementation and enforcement of an award. So that's where it might go to the next stage. However, in practice, we've seen that, It is only, in most cases, the local courts will still try to expedite the process for the recognition of the arbitral award because they will not change the outcome of the award. 

Joyce: Understood. Understood. You mentioned earlier you referred to delay tactics and public order objections. Are these the types of grounds that parties rely on to challenge recognition and enforcement in Cambodia? are you able to share some of the common tactics that parties use when they're trying to avoid having to pay up under arbitral awards? 

Guillaume: Yes. So public order is something that, as you might expect, could be interpreted very broadly. So there might be a number of grounds that are raised. Including the fact that there are some, in the event of an arbitral award in relation to a transaction which was not governed by Cambodian law, there could be an argument that at the enforcement state that because the scope of the transaction involves some assets in Cambodia or involved parties in Cambodia, then certain section of the transaction should have been governed by Cambodian law. In which case, what a local party may try to do is to try to get a Cambodian course challenging the fact that the initial award was only rendered based on a foreign law. In practice, it would not work, but they would probably still try, right? In the case of a dispute that is subject to Cambodian law already, there's probably less room for that. But again, you could have a situation where the main transaction is governed by foreign law and you have a section of like the security, for instance, enforcement of security. Would be governed by Cambrian law. In that case, there could be a mix of both, and that will also help the local party to try to raise argument to resist the recognition or enforcement of the award. We've seen that in a few instances. What we usually do when we work for a claimant in the enforcement of an arbitral award, we, of course, keep all these local tactics in mind. And from the start, But we just make sure that the filing, that the local filing with the court for recognition enforcement takes into consideration possible grounds that would be raised by the other side in relation to public order grounds. And we'll try to make sure we'll reject those grounds or make sure that we argue in a way that is in favor of the claimant for the recognition of the arbitral award. 

Joyce: Yeah, what you said is really interesting. I completely agree that it's important to prevent attempts by parties who try to use delay tactics to delay the enforcement of their wards. You mentioned also the certain procedures that you take when filing for recognition and enforcement to avoid, to reduce the ability of local parties to rely on these delay tactics. Is there anything else that parties can do during the arbitration itself maximize the chances of a successful enforcement in Cambodia? 

Guillaume: Yeah well basically everything starts at the time when the transaction is still underway so before it closes before it completes. So ensuring that the arbitration close in the contract is clear ensuring that you don't have as part of the same transaction or project, two different agreements where there could be one agreement subject to local courts and another agreement subject to arbitration, because then there could be a risk that local courts will find themselves having jurisdiction based on the first agreement. So making sure that from the start, the arbitration closing the contract and all the contracts that might be related to the transaction is clear. So that whenever entering into an M&A deal, you start with an NDA, you have a term sheet, you have an SPA, make sure that all the three are aligned. Otherwise, there might be if just one of the three agreements, and usually the term sheet or the NDA are drafted as a very early stage when things are not definitive. So if there is no clear arbitration provision from the start, then it could be potentially challenged later on. So that's really, really important. Another recommendation is, yes, when you start with a dispute, at the beginning of a dispute, there's potentially a recourse to local injunctive relief. We want to make sure that the courts are aware that it's just injunctive relief that's going to be subject to their jurisdiction and not the main case, there could be an assumption locally, and a local respondent or a local party involved in the dispute may try that, that the local party would attempt to have all the issues at hand in a dispute assessed during the injunctive relief proceedings. So it will try to have a main case, arguments for the main case, included in the injunctive relief proceedings, then, the injunctive relief decision might also impact the main case and might be contrary to the principle of having the case resolved through arbitration at a later stage. So that's also quite important. 

Joyce: That's very interesting. Thanks again for these helpful tips. A final question as we wrap up our conversation today. Are there any trends in Cambodia-related arbitrations which our listeners should be looking out for? 

Guillaume: Yes. So for both domestic and international arbitration, I think it's being favored really for a more sophisticated matter where there is a foreign element. So when, depending on the size of the transaction, the amount in dispute, or when things are fairly technical, When we're talking about new commercial practices, implementing transactions that are similar to what is being developed in Singapore and Cambodia would not be really familiar with, then in that case, the trend is to go to arbitration because we estimate that the local practitioners, judges, and lawyers would not be really familiar with the scope of these transactions and very long transaction documents. Also, it's quite natural, but in Cambodia, if you do a court filing, you will have to translate all the documents and supporting documents in Khmer. So when there is a foreign element and you're relying on transaction documents in English, you will tend to favor arbitration because it would be a lot more practical to use documents that are already in English. 

Joyce: And obviously, Khmer might not have the specific words for the specific transaction that you're trying to achieve. 

Guillaume: Indeed. That's usually quite the case, again, for very specific matters. And it is very technical matters. And it is better to start resolving the dispute by arbitration. You can use foreign experts. You can also use local experts, including in a foreign arbitration. So the local element will always be there. But it would be probably better to have a forum that is able to handle the dispute in English than just in command. 

Joyce: And I think, Guillaume, you mentioned to me previously that the mushrooming of specialized courts in Cambodia, which might take away work, so to speak, from arbitration. Are you able to share a bit more on that? 

Guillaume: Yeah, I think there's been an ongoing trend. Everything we've described in terms of the implementation, including of the National Arbitration Centre and the Commercial Arbitration Law, since the early 2000s, there's been a trend where Cambodia has tried to redevelop or update its legal framework. And as part of that, the Ministry of Justice has tried to implement dedicated courts. So for instance, the commercial court, which has been a project that's been ongoing for maybe 20 years. And probably the Cambodian authorities had to wait for more judges to be appointed, the newer generation. And this is all coming as well. So there would be also some local alternatives that are dedicated to resolving disputes, maybe simpler disputes or disputes of a more limited size in terms of the disputed amount and going through local courts, specialized courts. That's also going to be an option. But all in all, I think with the most sophisticated matters going to arbitration, arbitration has also helped raising the standards. So the courts will also know, I think courts would take example on some of the cases that have been resolved through arbitration or some of the matters that up to now have been resolved through arbitration, including through local arbitration, to build up their capacity in terms of dealing with specialized matters in specialized courts as well. 

Joyce: That's interesting. Guillaume, thank you so much for joining me on this podcast. This has been really insightful. Thanks again and have a lovely evening. 

Guillaume: You're welcome. It was a pleasure. 

Outro: Arbitral Insights is a Reed Smith production. Our producers are Ali McCardell and Shannon Ryan. For more information about Reed Smith's global international arbitration practice, email [email protected]. To learn about the Reed Smith Arbitration Pricing Calculator, a first-of-its-kind mobile app that forecasts the cost of arbitration around the world, search Arbitration Pricing Calculator on reedsmith.com or download for free through the Apple and Google Play app stores. You can find our podcast on podcast streaming platforms, reedsmith.com, and our social media accounts at Read Smith LLP. 

Disclaimer: This podcast is provided for educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice and is not intended to establish an attorney-client relationship, nor is it intended to suggest or establish standards of care applicable to particular or lawyers in any given situation. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Any views, opinions, or comments made by any external guest speaker. 

All rights reserved.

Transcript is auto-generated.

Shahwar Jamal Nizam, Partner and Managing Director at DFDL Bangladesh, joins Joyce Fong to provide insight on the arbitration regime in Bangladesh. This episode delves into the availability and enforcement of interim measures in support of arbitration, the procedural steps for enforcing foreign arbitral awards, and the judiciary’s increasingly pro-arbitration approach. Shahwar also examines common grounds for challenging enforcement, providing practical examples and advice for parties navigating the Bangladeshi arbitration landscape, supported by illustrative case studies from recent practice.

----more----

Transcript:

Intro: Welcome to Arbitral Insights, a podcast series brought to you by our International Arbitration Practice lawyers here at Reed Smith. I'm Peter Rosher, Global Head of Reed Smith's International Arbitration Practice. I hope you enjoy the industry commentary, insights and anecdotes we share with you in the course of this series, wherever in the world you are. If you have any questions about any of the topics discussed, please do contact our speakers. And with that, let's get started. 

Joyce: Welcome to the latest edition of our Arbitral Insights podcast series. I am delighted to have Shahwar Nizam as our guest today. Good afternoon, Shahwar. It's a pleasure to be chatting with you this afternoon.

Shahwar: Good afternoon, Joyce. The pleasure is all mine. Thanks for inviting me on this series of podcasts.

Joyce: For the benefit of our listeners, Shahwar is the Managing Director of DFDL Bangladesh. He is qualified in Bangladesh, England, Wales, and has substantial experience in the energy and infrastructure industries. So while to kick us off, let's perhaps briefly discuss the arbitration landscape in Bangladesh. I believe that Bangladesh is a signatory to the New York Convention. How does the legal framework support the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in Bangladesh?

Shahwar: So the Bangladesh arbitration landscape is based on the Bangladesh Arbitration Act 2001. And that act is actually based on the UNCITRAL model laws. Bangladesh is a part of the New York Convention, and as part of that, these laws were brought about. So the laws are pretty internationally sort of standardized and quite well drafted. And the implementation of it has also evolved for the betterment of arbitration awards enforcement in Bangladesh over the years. It's basically something that is gaining more and more popularity and it's becoming more and more acceptable.

Joyce: Thank you Shahwar, that's really positive to hear. Based on your experience, what are the most common seats for the Foreign Awards which you are seeing coming to be enforced and recognized in Bangladesh?

Shahwar: So the most common seat for across the board is actually SISC. Because of the proximity of Singapore and because of the fact that SISC has actually done a lot of outreach programs in Bangladesh, it is commonly perceived to be sort of more usable, user-friendly. So Singapore has done a pretty good job in sort of showcasing itself as a neutral venue. From a cost perspective it's uh you know it's closer to bangladesh than say London or anywhere else and now i mean it's more difficult to get to Hong Kong than Singapore so you know SISC has taken the pole position in terms of the popularity of all the arbitration venues but having said that for a lot of the government contracts we see exit arbitrations you have the trade association arbitrations as well you know like the London Sugar Association for shipping we see a lot of LMA arbitration. We see for cotton and textiles, we see the Liverpool Cotton Association arbitrations. We see the Phosphor arbitrations as well. And also in any event, HKAIC, the Hong Kong Arbitration Centre, historically has been quite prominent as well. So we still see some of that, especially with Chinese parties on the other side. And also ICC Paris, ICC London. I mean, all of these are quite sort of prominent for arbitration need involving Bangladesh.

Joyce: All right, that's really interesting. Well, let's now turn to enforcement. As you know, it's common for arbitral tribunals to issue interim awards and orders, for example, to preserve assets and evidence. Are such awards and orders enforceable in Bangladesh under the New York Convention?

Shahwar: Yes, they are directly enforceable. By directly enforceable, I mean an arbitration award from a foreign arbitration, as long as it falls under the scope of the Arbitration Act as an international arbitration award, it is given the same legal status as a decree of a court in Bangladesh. So just like enforcement of any decree of a court in Bangladesh, the arbitration award can also be enforced through the courts in Bangladesh. And there are specific courts through which the arbitration awards are sort of enforced. So, you know, there are certain procedural aspects that you have to qualify for in sort of enforcement. But once you go through and file the enforcement proceedings, the arbitration awards can be enforced through those.

Joyce: Okay. On a related note, can Bangladeshi courts issue orders such as injunctions or asset preservation orders in support of foreign seated arbitrations?

Shahwar: Yes. So for foreign seated arbitrations, while arbitrations are initiated or ongoing, parties in Bangladesh can apply for interim orders, directions, asset preservation orders, or all of those things under a special provision called Section 7A of the Arbitration Act 2001. That gives quite wide discretionary powers to the court, to the high court, to consider applications in support of the arbitration that is taking place outside Bangladesh. And also, if there is an interim order made in the arbitration tribunal itself, while there is a separate section that gives the legal status of those arbitrations as if there are interim orders of the tribunal themselves, to support those directions or orders, parties can also use the Section 7A route to apply to the court to sort of give force to those orders. If they are anticipating a contempt or breach of those interim orders given by the tribunal.

Joyce: It's great to hear that the Bangladeshi courts are so supportive of arbitration and the parties arbitrating. So moving on to final awards then, could you please share a brief overview of the process for seeking recognition and enforcement of foreign awards in Bangladesh? How long does this process normally take and is there a deadline for parties to enforce foreign awards in Bangladesh?

Shahwar: So usually it takes two to three years. The way it works, as I mentioned, that arbitration awards treat it as if they are decree of the local courts. And the way it works is that the arbitration award has to be received in Bangladesh, you know, notarized and consularized, which means that wherever it is a foreign arbitration, the award has to be taken to the Bangladesh High Commission or the embassy of that country, get it attested by that High Commission and then sent to Bangladesh. And along with other documents submitted to the court, and then the proceedings start. And it usually takes two to three years for the enforcement to take place because Bangladesh has a lot of due process safeguards built in the civil court of civil procedure. So that's why, you know, it usually takes a bit of time.

Joyce: I see. And is there a right of appeal to decision of the court to enforce or to not enforce an arbitral award?

Shahwar: Yes, I mean, that's actually something that we have to face with, or that's something that creates problems and delays. I mean, while we have seen a lot of the appellate courts or the superior court judgment that gives enforcement of international arbitration awards sort of priority, or they recognize arbitration agreement and arbitration award and gives direction for enforcement, In the lower courts, as I mentioned, because there are a lot of due process safeguards built in in the court of civil procedure. Parties usually file a lot of different types of application challenging the arbitral award themselves or challenge the procedural aspects of it and all these other things that sort of create a lot of delays. But what we have seen is that ultimately the appellate courts usually are quite stern in sort of upholding the sanctity of the arbitration awards and the Arbitration Act.

Joyce: And how long would an appeal process typically take? Because you mentioned earlier two to three years for recognition and enforcement. So if you add in an appeal process, how long are we looking at?

Shahwar: I mean, that's like a very difficult question to answer because, as I said, you have the high court process to go through. You have the appellate division to go through. And in Bangladesh, already the courts are overburdened with cases. We don't have enough courts or enough judges to look after the cases. So, I mean, it can get dragged up to five to six years.

Joyce: Okay. Okay. And just from your experience, do parties tend to fight it all the way to the end or do parties tend to settle or reach an amicable resolution of the issue before?

Shahwar: I mean, we have seen both. We have seen in some instances parties going all the way, but in many instances, parties usually try to use these proceedings to settle, to negotiate.

Joyce: Just going back then to the challenges which parties can make, What grounds do parties tend to rely on when trying to challenge the recognition and enforcement of foreign awards in Bangladesh?

Shahwar: So the Bangladeshi Arbitration Act, as I mentioned, it's based on the UNCITRAL model law. So it has the usual sort of exceptions or grounds under which arbitration award can be challenged. What we see is that in Bangladesh, in some instances, these are interpreted very widely. For example, the public policy or the national interest, right? I mean, these are the two grounds that we see used most commonly. And in certain instances, we see them being interpreted very, very widely. Okay. And that sometimes becomes the challenge. And also, I think some of the other grounds that are commonly used is that the arbitration or the arbitration agreement was not formed properly or the arbitration arbitrators or the tribunal lack jurisdiction or they considered issues that were beyond the scope of the arbitration award. Or sometimes we see, I mean, very petty things like what is argued is that the arbitrator did not have the requisite expertise. And that's something that we have seen in instances where the arbitrator is not a lawyer or a judge or not legally qualified, right? So they basically try and argue that, oh, this arbitrator did not have the requisite expertise. In doing that. And also, sometimes we see that, you know, there are a lot of times fairness and equity is argued in the sense that, oh, they were not given enough time, or they were only allowed two rounds of time extensions, they were not allowed more than that. So these are the kind of grounds that we see most commonly used. I mean, the more successful grounds for challenging, in our experience has been the public policy and national interest.

Joyce: I see.

Shahwar: The most successful cases are those where these two grounds have been pursued quite heavily and where the lower judiciary or the lower courts sort of interpreted these two exceptions quite widely. Now, unfortunately, we haven't seen that many cases that have gone all the way up to the appellate division where some of these particular matters have been sort of dealt with in that way. But in most instances, we see that the superior courts, the appellate division are quite pro-enforcement.

Joyce: That's great to hear. Bearing in mind what you've just said, Shahwar, is there anything which foreign parties and tribunals can or should do to maximize the chances of a successful enforcement in bangladesh?

Shahwar: Yeah I mean I think there are firstly when doing during the contracting stage parties should have very clear arbitration agreements right parties should have very clear clauses that says that stipulates the venue the the formation of the tribunal and the the seat i mean all these points should be quite clearly stated out and and that is why some arbitration seats like SISC are becoming more popular because you have the standard clauses that can be used and that are very clear, right? So that's like the first thing that we always advise, to have the very clear sort of language in terms of the arbitration clauses and also as to what would be the subject of arbitration. Going back, governing laws, the law of the arbitrations, and all of these things should be very clearly spelt out. What procedural rules they would follow for the arbitration, all of those things should be clearly spelt out. Because in some instances, you have seen arguments arising out of the procedural rules that are being used because they were not spelt out in the arbitration clause. And those kind of things can become problematic at the enforcement stage. During the preceding stage, I mean, you know, it's sort of standard common knowledge. I mean, you know, if there are sort of Bangladesh law, if it is a foreign arbitration, if there are Bangladesh law aspects to it, then you have good sort of solid Bangladesh law experts, Bangladesh law opinions and all of these things. Because those things sometimes create big problems because, you see, opinions may vary between practitioners, right? So it would be advisable to have sort of clear-cut opinions, clear-cut analysis of laws and opinions from Bangladeshi practitioners that should not be brought into question at a later stage, right? So that's one aspect where we have seen things go sideways. Also, parties should consider using the Section 7A provision for interim or asset preservation orders, injunctions, and other things while the arbitration is ongoing to make sure that there is something left at the end of the proceedings for the enforcement to bite off. And then once the award is received, just bring it back to Bangladesh as soon as possible for enforcement. You know, because there is delays in the backlogs and, you know, a lack of sort of enough courts and other things, things can be delayed. So my suggestion is to bring it as soon as possible to Bangladesh.

Joyce: That's really helpful, Shahwar. So my takeaway is, firstly, have clear contracts. Secondly, get Bangladesh law advice at an early stage during proceedings. Thirdly, if there are assets in Bangladesh, then look to preserve it under Section 7A. and then once you get the award, go as soon as possible to Bangladesh for enforcement.

Shahwar: Yes.

Joyce: That's a really handy tip. Okay, so two final questions for you, Shahwar. What recent trends are you seeing in Bangladesh-related international arbitrations? And secondly, what trends do you expect to see in the next kind of two to three years?

Shahwar: Okay, the first thing that we see is that arbitration is becoming more and more popular. Okay, especially for cross-border matters, cross-border contracts, government contracts, and even private contracts that involve multiple parties. People are becoming more and more open to arbitration, and people are becoming more familiar with arbitration, and familiar with international arbitration, and they're getting more and more comfortable with international arbitration, so much so that we see a lot of the template government contracts. For example, for all of the energy and power related contracts, arbitration clauses have become standardized. I mean, initially we saw sort of a lot of English law-governed contracts with ICC or SIIC arbitration. Now we see the government suggesting bifurcated arbitration clauses where you have one arbitration part for anything beyond a certain value, but the smaller value matters to be resolved in local arbitration in the Bangladesh International Arbitration Center. So that is a clear indication that even the government wants to promote arbitration. And yes, a lot of the other government bodies, I mean, not just the power of energy ministry, a lot of the other government bodies are having sort of arbitration or similar proceedings within their framework to facilitate sort of arbitration and alternative dispute resolution mechanism. I mean, we see for a lot of the construction contracts, all the government concession contracts, all the government purchase contracts for commodities, for equipment, for other things. We see a lot of the maritime-related contracts. I mean, almost all of the government-related contracts are now, I mean, it's quite common to see arbitration clauses in them. For private contracts also, if it is cross-border, we see that. Even though the government and BIAC, the Bangladeshi Arbitration Center, is trying to promote arbitration for local-to-local contracts, that's something that I think is yet in the development stage. But the threat is that it is becoming more and more acceptable, a form of resolution. And even mediation, in some respects, is becoming more and more sort of common and acceptable. I mean, recently, I was talking to the head of the Arbitration Center in Bangladesh, and he was suggesting that we worked together to do sort of like an outreach program across the country so that, you know, not just in the capital, but in other places for business, people choose arbitration as a method of dispute resolution. So that's, I think, one, that's the trend, and I think the development that we will see going forward.

Joyce: Oh, that's really interesting to hear, and I'm looking forward to seeing arbitration becoming more and more popular in Bangladesh, for sure. Well, Shahwar, thank you so much for joining me on this podcast. I've learned a lot and I'm sure our listeners will agree.

Shahwar: Well, thank you very much for inviting me.

Joyce: Take care.

Outro: Arbitral Insights is a Reed Smith production. Our producers are Ali McCardell and Shannon Ryan. For more information about Reed Smith's Global International Arbitration Practice, email [email protected]. To learn about the Reed Smith Arbitration Pricing Calculator, a first-of-its-kind mobile app that forecasts the cost of arbitration around the world, search Arbitration Pricing Calculator on reedsmith.com or download for free through the Apple and Google Play app stores. You can find our podcast on podcast streaming platforms, reedsmith.com, and our social media accounts at Reed Smith LLP. 

Disclaimer: This podcast is provided for educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice and is not intended to establish an attorney-client relationship, nor is it intended to suggest or establish standards of care applicable to particular lawyers in any given situation. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Any views, opinions, or comments made by any external guest speaker are not to be attributed to Reed Smith LLP.

All rights reserved. 

Transcript is auto-generated.