The Arbitration Station

Season 2 of the world's best Sweden-based arbitration podcast is almost here. In this short trailer, we let you know what you can expect from the new season, which will be aired starting next Tuesday (February 20).

In the final episode of the year, we wrap up the Arbitration Year 2017 with a quick summary of events from the year. Furthermore, we talk about stay of enforcement pending annulment/set aside of an arbitral award, a topic on which we have just co-written an article. Therefore, Happy Fun Time is devoted to article writing - where, why and with whom.

In the second to last episode of 2017, we address three issues on E: expert witnesses (who are they, how do you prepare them, how much do you pay them), exclusion agreements (where and how can parties opt out of court review) and ethics (which is Happy Fun Time, in case you didn't know that ethics was fun).

Happy holidays fellow arbitration nerds! This week's episode focuses on holiday gifts. If you're unlucky, you will soon be hit with a request for provisional measures, which is customary this time of year. If so, you might enjoy our discussions about this topic, from both the commercial and treaty-based perspective. If not, we have other gifts for you - Happy Fun Time this week is a list of suggested holiday gifts.

Joel is at the Working Group III Meeting in Vienna, where the possibility of ISDS reform is being discussed. He interviews Michele Podestà about a paper that was put before the Working Group, looking comparatively at how international courts and tribunals are composed. The Happy Fun Time is about mediation, or rather: why don't arbitration lawyers care about mediation?

In this week's episode, Brian interviews Shirin Saif about witness examinations, while Joel gives an introductory lecture to UNCITRAL (prompted by the upcoming session in Working Group III - the advanced session will come in next week's episode, when Joel calls in from the Working Group meeting in Vienna). For Happy Fun Time, we display our lack of understanding - and our respect - for the UK system with barristers and Queen's Counsels and what have you.

As advertised earlier, we spend quite some time on dissenting opinions in arbitration - good, bad and ugly ones. Furthermore, can/should arbitrators be compelled to take the witness stand in domestic court, to talk about deliberations? Finally, we have a Happy Fun Time talking about the myriad of professional organisations out there.

To celebrate Brian's recent status as dual citizen, Joel gives him a quiz and also discusses the standing of dual national investors in investment arbitration. The second "substantive" segment sees Brian explaining some do's and don'ts with respect to opening statements. Finally, this week's Happy Fun Time is neither fun nor happy: we discuss #metoo and its implications for the field of international arbitration.

Joel is in The Hague and Brian has just returned from London. The former trip involves an interview with Kendra Magraw about sports arbitration, while Brian's London trip centered on the super-inspiring ITF Conference hosted by BIICL, that he summarizes with starry eyes. For Happy Fun Time, we try to figure out whether there is any meaningful difference between civil law and common law.

We use a recent ICSID decision in which the language was decided by coin toss as a reason to talk about the procedural language in arbitration more generally. Furthermore, we discuss how certain human rights issues interact with international arbitration and for Happy Fun Time, we clarify a thing or two on how to curate your online habits as an arbitration lawyer.