International Arbitration Law Homework: Questions and Answers Analysis

This document provides a comprehensive analysis of various scenarios within International Arbitration Law, addressing key aspects of the arbitration process. The solution begins by outlining the arbitrator's role in managing the proceedings, including controlling questioning, ensuring fairness, and managing evidence. The document also delves into critical issues such as document production, handling of hearsay, and addressing disputes when facts are lacking. The document also explores the roles and responsibilities of representatives in witness preparation and testimony. The document includes guidance on time allocation for submissions and oral arguments. The document addresses considerations related to discovery, legal professional privilege, and the application of different legal systems. The document concludes with a discussion on ensuring justice and expediting the arbitration process, referencing relevant legal principles and guidelines. References to academic sources are included to support the analysis.

International Arbitration Law 1
INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION LAW
By (Student’s Name)
Professor’s Name
College
Course
Date

International Arbitration Law 2
INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION LAW
Q1. I will stop the lawyer and direct him to drop his line of questioning by restricting
himself only to the current case. By doing this, the lawyer will focus on the present case, and the
defendant will be given justice. The outcome is that both claimant and defendant will have
fairness.
Q2. The respondent should not provide the document, as a rule, does not apply.
Moreover, these are mere allegations, and no evidence has been adduced thus they will not be
substantiated. The respondent should restrict its defense on the evidence and ignore the hearsay
by the claimant (Pierce 2017).
Q3. The lack of facts would not mean that the dispute no longer exists. The arbitrator
should demand more evidence on facts. If this evidence is not brought, the arbitrator should let
the case proceed and make a determination based on the available facts to help solve the dispute.
Q4. I would do the simulation as required and check on the oral performance of the
witness. Guideline 20 permits the representatives to help in the witness statement and expert
reports. Guideline 24 allows me to help the expert as he prepares to give the testimony at the
hearing. It would not make a difference if instructed by the US attorney.
Q5. I will direct that each party submit the written submission at the end of the three-day
hearing. The direction: I direct that each party must submit their written submission by the close
of business 15th March 2018, at 10 PM.
Q6. I will decide to allow the lawyer to freely put his case but direct him from time to
time by allowing my colleagues to ask him questions where they deem it fit. This will serve
justice to the party represented by the rambling attorney based on his time allocation (Hughes
2017).

International Arbitration Law 3
Q7. The Claimant will be given 2.5 days to put forward their case while the respondent
will be given two days to submit their oral submission. Part of the remaining half a day will be
used by the Claimant to give a rejoinder, and the hearing will be called to a halt.
Q8. To do justice, both the oral and written evidence will be allowed. However, the oral
evidence will only be used a priori necessary (Yu and Olmos 2015). This will not only serve
justice but also in line with the need to expedite arbitration process. The oral evidence of lay
witness can be taken by translation but will be limited to questions from the respondent.
Q9. The arbitration should not order discovery. This is because, in doing so, will be an
infringement to the Russian party because there is no such thing in Russian Civil law. Therefore,
it will not serve justice for both parties if ordered (Stuesser 2009).
Q10. The arbitration should not order for the discovery of the communications. This is
because the Respondent is based in China where such concept as legal professional privilege is
lacking. Thus, to serve both justices, such a discovery should not be allowed.

International Arbitration Law 4
References
Hughes, B., 2017. Book Review: International Arbitration in Korea. Asian Dispute
Review, 19(3), pp.144-145.
Pierce, J.V., 2017. Book Review: Document Production in International Arbitration, by Reto
Marghitola.(2015 Kluwer Law International BV, The Netherlands). Journal of International
Arbitration, 34(1), pp.110-113.
Stuesser, L., 2009. A Comparison of the Law of Evidence. Journal of the Australasian law
teachers association, 2(1&2), 73.
Yu, H.L. and Olmos, G.M.B., 2015. Road To Nowhere?–A Comparative Legal Analysis on the
Enforcement of Yukos Awards. International Arbitration Law Review, 18(4), pp.80-94.