Bulk-deformed potentials for toric Fano surfaces, wall-crossing and period

We provide an inductive algorithm to compute the bulk-deformed potentials for toric Fano surfaces via wall-crossing techniques and a tropical-holomorphic correspondence theorem for holomorphic discs. As an application of the correspondence theorem, we also prove a big quantum period theorem for toric Fano surfaces which relates the log descendant Gromov-Witten invariants with the oscillatory integrals of the bulk-deformed potentials.Comment: 44 pages, 9 figures, comments are welcom

Who is in? Who is out? How the Uncitral Transparency Rules Can Influence the Upcoming Amendments of the ICSID Arbitration Rules

The International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes (hereinafter "ICSID") has started its fourth amendment of its Arbitration Rules since 2016. The issue of transparency has been highlighted as a delicate issue in ICSID ongoing current amendment. It is also listed in the topics that have been identified for potential amendment. This article analyses how the issues of access to hearings and confidentiality over information arising from arbitration is treated under the current framework. A comparison is made against the Transparency Rules. The analysis is also made against the comments received from the public whose views are analysed as a possible direction the amendment may take

Carrot and Stick Approach in English Mediation–There Must Be Another Way

Intending to achieve costs savings and delivering value in the dispute management process in both civil and commercial disputes, parties are "encouraged" to engage in mediation according to the decisions handed down in Halsey and PGF II by the English courts. The suspicion of de facto or implied compulsory mediation was further expressed with the implementation of the EU Mediation Directive. Disputants are actively encouraged to take up mediation. Failing to do so, costs sanctions will be used as a "stick" to penalize for having unreasonably refused to mediate in the eyes of the courts. This development has seen the voluntary nature of mediation, the need to educate the parties and the need for a legislative framework being sidelined

Fairy is back - have you got your wand ready?

First paragraph: In relation to international commercial arbitration, the exclusion of arbitration from the scope of application of the new Regulation (EU) No. 1215/2012, of the European Parliament and the Council of 12 December 2012 on Jurisdiction and the Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (hereinafter the Regulation), in Article 1(2)(d) re-defines the litigation tactics for this popular method of dispute resolution dealing with cross-border disputes, especially in terms of anti-suit injunctions. This provision is in consonance with the European Court’s West Tankers decision, which not only forces English courts to stop their over-zealous willingness to grant an anti-suit injunction across borders but also has sent the issue of anti-suit injunction back to the battle-field

Can third party funding deliver justice in international commercial arbitration?

Third party funding arrives at international commercial arbitration without clear guidelines. The recognition and acceptance of its legality is hampered by the omissions of all stakeholders' rights involved in international commercial arbitration. In balancing the funder’s contractual rights to gather information under the third party funding agreement and stakeholders' rights to know, the current research examined how non-disclosure of the third party funding agreement would prevent the arbitrators from fulfilling procedural justice required for the integrity of arbitration on their part and impede the opposing party’s right to know during the proceedings. The research highlights the issues from the delivery of procedural and substantive justice as well as suggesting legal and jurisprudential grounds in third party funding governance. It also points out that all issues examined will ultimately contribute to the failure in delivering justice in international commercial arbitration if third party funding is left to self-governance

Three may not be a crowd - who is in the driver's seat under Section 9 of the Contract (Third Party Rights) Act 2017

Third party funding arrives at international commercial arbitration without clear guidelines. The recognition and acceptance of its legality is hampered by the omissions of all stakeholder’s rights involved in international commercial arbitration. In balancing the funder’s contractual rights to gather information under the third party funding agreement and stakeholders’ rights to know, the current research examined how non-disclosure of the third party funding agreement would prevent the arbitrators from fulfilling procedural justice required for the integrity of arbitration on their part and impede the opposing party’s right to know during the proceedings. The research highlights the issues from the delivery of procedural and substantive justice as well as suggesting legal and jurisprudential grounds in third party funding governance. It also points out that all issues examined will ultimately contribute to the failure in delivering justice in international commercial arbitration if third party funding is left to self-governance

Written Arbitration Agreements – What Written Arbitration Agreements?

First paragraph: This article considers the issue of an oral arbitration agreement in relation to the New York Convention. As Townsend once said "[a]rbitration offers a means to an end, and the end is to the resolution of disputes." This end would be extremely difficult to achieve without the approval of national courts. Fortunately, with 146 signatory countries signed on the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards 1958 (The New York Convention), the success of this Convention has attracted businessmen into using arbitration to resolve their disputes. Nevertheless, a voluntary arbitration cannot be commenced without a valid arbitration agreement. Setting out to achieve harmonisation in the enforcement of arbitration agreements, art.II of the New York Convention provides the written requirements to be followed by all 146 signatory countries. Accordingly, written requirements for arbitration are imposed upon all signatory countries and they are obliged under the convention to recognise all arbitration agreements which are made in writing