Robin J Frank’s Post

📑 The second edition of the CEE Legal Matters Comparative Legal Guide: #Competition 2024 is just published. 🖊 Our senior partner Uros Popovic and our associate Tina Petrić were an exclusive contributors for Serbia. 📌 The #CEELM Comparative Legal Guide: Competition 2024 looks at the main competition pieces of legislation, notable recent updates, the main concerns of the competition authority as well as its sanctioning record, how a leniency policy is applied, and an overview of relevant recent abuse cases, as well as the impact of COVID-19. #BD2P #CEELM #Competition #LegalGuide

Mass litigation and new class action regime in Austria: check out Christian Lenz and my latest contribution of the Austrian chapter on the class action regime in the Legal 500 comparative guide #masslitigation #brandltalos

📑 The second edition of the CEE Legal Matters Comparative Legal Guide: #Competition 2024 is just published. 🖊 BD2P senior partner Uros Popovic, and associate Tina Petrić, were an exclusive contributors for Serbia. 📌 The #CEELM Comparative Legal Guide: Competition 2024 looks at the main competition pieces of legislation, notable recent updates, the main concerns of the competition authority as well as its sanctioning record, how a leniency policy is applied, and an overview of relevant recent abuse cases, as well as the impact of COVID-19. #BD2P #CEELM #Competition #LegalGuide

𝐍𝐞𝐰 𝐏𝐨𝐬𝐭 | 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐀𝐫𝐛𝐢𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐖𝐨𝐫𝐤𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐩| Navigating Uncharted Territories: ICSID Tribunal’s Power to Remove Counsel Aarya Parihar (B.A. LL.B. student at Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University) writes for the Arbitration Workshop on the power of Tribunals to remove counsels in ICSID. In this post, the author delves into the pivotal role of legal representation in arbitration proceedings, particularly focusing on the authority of ICSID Tribunals in managing the participation of counsel. It is an attempt to examine the extent of ICSID Tribunals' powers in regulating counsel involvement, drawing upon notable cases and arbitral decisions. The Author navigates through the intricate procedural nuances within investor-state arbitration. Furthermore, the post probes into the complexities surrounding counsel withdrawal requests, highlighting considerations such as undue delay and potential prejudice to the parties. Drawing parallels with decisions from other international tribunals, the text underscores the need for clarity and consistency in addressing counsel-related issues. Concluding with suggestions, the post advocates for a nuanced approach to delineating the boundaries of ICSID Tribunals’ authority concerning counsel representation. It calls for potential revisions to the ICSID Convention to provide explicit guidance on managing counsel resignation or removal in cases of conflict or irreconcilable breakdowns in attorney-client relationships while also stressing the importance of leveraging precedents from domestic courts and international tribunals for informed decision-making. Please have a look at this article on the aforesaid issue and share it with your peers and enthusiasts of arbitration law and policy. Comments and suggestions, as always, are welcome. The link to the article is: https://lnkd.in/dZBXC7XW.

I am thrilled to share that my article on 'Public Policy Doctrine: An Obstacle in the Enforcement of Arbitral Awards' has been published by Jurists' Junction. The article gives insights about evolution of the public policy doctrine in India and it's implications on the enforcement of awards. Here's the link! https://lnkd.in/d4pSpADi #arbitration #adr #law #publicpolicy #article

Christian Lenz and Patrick Mittlböck provide an overview of the laws and regulations applicable to class actions in Austria in this year's Country Comparative Guide by The Legal 500.   The Legal 500's Country Comparative Guides are produced in collaboration with the world's leading lawyers and provide the in-house community with a practical overview of the laws and regulations in key jurisdictions for specific practice areas.   The guides are now online available and free to access: https://lnkd.in/dnn7Kh7M   #legalforbusiness #countrycomparativeguides #legal500

The NYC Bar has issued a report on three crucial international treaties: 1. The Hague Convention of 30 June 2005 on Choice of Court Agreements (the “COCA Convention”), 2. The Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters (the “Judgments Convention”), 3. The United Nations Convention on International Settlement Agreements Resulting from Mediation (the “Singapore Convention”). The report recommends ratifying all three treaties and implementing them through a dedicated federal law, akin to Chapter II of the Federal Arbitration Act. This approach aims to enhance predictability for litigants by establishing transparent and accessible legal systems that uniformly apply treaty obligations across the United States. The full report is available here: https://lnkd.in/gUWjn7wK #NYCBar #InternationalLaw #LegalInsights

🇵🇱 Thanks to Visegrad Insight for putting this timely and important panel together. I was happy to be included in this amazing line up of experts.🔥👇#ruleoflaw #poland #eu

The decision of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) of the 15th of October 2024 reminds the courts or tribunal of a Member State against whose decisions there is no judicial remedy - such as the Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court (CoA) - of the obligation to refer questions concerning the interpretation or validity of a provision of EU law to the ECJ for a preliminary ruling, and, if such reference was not made, set out the reasons why. In the recent order of 17 September 2024 in the Nokia v Mala (UPC_CoA_227/2024) the CoA met with its EU law obligations by explicity ruling on why in this case there was no need to refer questions to the ECJ (see par. 32 and 33). https://lnkd.in/eEejtfRJ