Rely on the most comprehensive, up-to-date legal content designed and curated by lawyers for lawyers
Work faster and smarter to improve your drafting productivity without increasing risk
Accelerate the creation and use of high quality and trusted legal documents and forms
Streamline how you manage your legal business with proven tools and processes
Manage risk and compliance in your organisation to reduce your risk profile
Stay up to date and informed with insights from our trusted experts, news and information sources
Access the best content in the industry, effortlessly — confident that your news is trustworthy and up to date.
With over 30 practice areas, we have all bases covered. Find out how we can help
Our trusted tax intelligence solutions, highly-regarded exam training and education materials help guide and tutor Tax professionals
Regulatory, business information and analytics solutions that help professionals make better decisions
A leading provider of software platforms for professional services firms
In-depth analysis, commentary and practical information to help you protect your business
LexisNexis Blogs shed light on topics affecting the legal profession and the issues you're facing
Legal professionals trust us to help navigate change. Find out how we help ensure they exceed expectations
Lex Chat is a LexisNexis current affairs podcast sharing insights on topics for the legal profession
Discuss the latest legal developments, ask questions, and share best practice with other LexisPSL subscribers
Young arbitrators were in for a treat last week at the ICC YAF seminar, hosted by King & Spalding. The seminar focused on written presentation of a party’s case in international arbitration and considered the topic from a variety of angles.
Keynote addresses came from Philipp Habegger, partner at Lalive, Zurich, who spoke from an arbitrator’s perspective, before Murray Rosen QC delivered his thoughts from the perspective of judge sitting in the Chancery Division at the High Court.
Both speakers emphasised that the purpose of a memorial is to persuade the arbitrator that the argument presented is the right one; highlighting the facts/evidence and the legal authority to back up that evidence in order for the arbitrator to draft a reward in your favour. There should be a logical and clear flow to the memorial with a clear structure and narrative flowing from the table of contents at the start. It was recommended that these were drafted commencing with the strongest legal argument, should explain what relief is sought and should be as concise as possible.
Mr Habegger warned that witness statements should not become memorials; it should not serve to introduce new facts or issues. He also recommended that Redfern Schedules should only refer to the paragraph number from the memorial, with a possible note as to why it is relevant, rather than utilising the columns for further details.
Mr Rosen QC spoke about pleadings and referred to the three ‘P’s: preparation, presentation and persuasion. Pleadings must include the contentions of fact and law upon which the party relies and should be presented concisely. Every fact must be pleaded and proved. Mr Rosen QC also spoke of knowing when to stop and preventing allowing the narrative from heading down diversions and via a scenic route.
During questions from the floor, both speakers again emphasised that arbitrators and judges favour concise pleadings where lawyers are brave and confident enough to narrow down issues, state where issues are irrelevant and to keep the length of written documents down so far as possible. Both speakers also agreed that nothing of any importance should be placed within the footnotes. If it is material to the document, it should be in the main body of the text. They also agreed that pictorial or charts/graphs can be very useful for inclusion in written documents, especially if the client or expert has used such a device to explain a point; they can be particularly persuasive when used appropriately.
The seminar then turned to a panel format, with four speakers invited to address differing angles of written documents. Sarah Vasani of King & Spalding spoke about Investment Arbitration and the Word Race; Aimee-Jane Lee of Debevoise & Plimpton spoke about expert reports and the importance of picking the right expert, Catherine Reeves of LexisNexis spoke about potential lessons to be learnt from the CPR and Jackson Reforms and Peter Nikitin of Arnold & Porter spoke about the importance of instructing a good translator for written documents.
Each of the panellists spoke eloquently on their subject and their main points are summarised below.
Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK
* denotes a required field
**excludes LexisPSL Practice Compliance, Practice Management and Risk and Compliance. To discuss trialling these LexisPSL services please email customer service via our online form. Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK. We may terminate this trial at any time or decide not to give a trial, for any reason. Trial includes one question to LexisAsk during the length of the trial. See our full terms here.
Access this article and thousands of others like it free by subscribing to our blog.
Read full article
Already a subscriber? Login
0330 161 1234