CONCLUSION—THE EFFECTIVE, LOYAL AND HONEST COUNSEL’S ROLE - Counsel as Client's First Enemy in Arbitration?

Author(s): 

Ugo Draetta

Page Count: 

4 pages

Media Description: 

1 PDF Download

Published: 

June, 2014

Jurisdictions: 

International

Practice Areas: 

Advocacy

Subscribe to download

PDF538.53 KB

$40.00

Add to cart

Description: 

Originally from: Counsel as Client's First Enemy in Arbitration?

Preview Page

CONCLUSION—THE EFFECTIVE, LOYAL

AND HONEST COUNSEL’S ROLE

 

I would like to conclude this book with some final remarks of

a general nature.

 

Counsel are hired by their clients because such clients place

all their confidence in them in order to win their case. Counsels

have the professional obligation to do their best to achieve such

result.

 

However, both counsel and their clients should be aware that

there is a potential inherent conflict between their respective

interests.

 

Whether one likes it or not, it would be hypocritical to deny

that international arbitration has become a big business for counsel,

and, by the way, for arbitrators and arbitration institutions as well.

Counsel have, obviously, a legitimate interest in receiving from

their clients the compensation they deserve. However, it is equally

obvious that many situations may develop during the course of the

arbitration proceedings where such counsel’s interest conflicts with

their client’s interest.

 

Each one of these situations has been discussed in this book.

I would like to remind, for examples, the cases where:

 

(a) there is an obvious chance to reach an early

settlement between the parties on terms acceptable

to both of them and such chance is ignored by

counsel;

(b) counsel fail to renounce their mandate when there

is a risk that their appointment in the course of the

arbitration proceedings imperils the integrity of

such proceedings, thus causing disruptions and

costly delays;

(c) it would be in the best interest of a time and cost

effective arbitral process to avoid spending

unnecessary and costly counsel’s time in frivolous

challenges of arbitrators or procedural objections,

excessively long submissions or volume of