{"id":7121,"date":"2013-11-26T01:11:46","date_gmt":"2013-11-26T06:11:46","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.journals.law.harvard.edu\/ilj\/?p=7121"},"modified":"2013-12-03T01:28:32","modified_gmt":"2013-12-03T06:28:32","slug":"role-of-judges-in-determining-jurisdiction-of-arbitration-tribunals-to-be-clarified-in-upcoming-supreme-court-case","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/ilj\/2013\/11\/role-of-judges-in-determining-jurisdiction-of-arbitration-tribunals-to-be-clarified-in-upcoming-supreme-court-case\/","title":{"rendered":"Role of Judges in Determining Jurisdiction of Arbitration Tribunals to be Clarified in Upcoming Supreme Court Case"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Posted by Kylie Kim \u2013 November 26, 2013 @ 01:11<\/p>\n<p>In January of last year, the D.C. Circuit ruled on the contentious <a href=\"http:\/\/www.cadc.uscourts.gov\/internet\/opinions.nsf\/5D6C3A833731DA72852579880056CC38\/$file\/11-7021-1352802.pdf\"><i>BG Group PLC v. Republic of Argentina<\/i>.<b>\u00a0<\/b><\/a>The court found that an arbitral tribunal did not have the authority to address a particular dispute between a U.K. investor, BG Group, and Argentina because \u201cBG Group was required to commence a lawsuit in Argentina\u2019s courts and wait [18] months before filing for arbitration[,] pursuant to Article 8(3) [of the 1993 Britain-Argentina Bilateral Investment Treaty (\u201cBIT\u201d)], if the dispute remained.\u201d The Supreme Court <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scotusblog.com\/case-files\/cases\/bg-group-plc-v-republic-of-argentina\/\">granted BG Group\u2019s cert petition<\/a>\u00a0and is scheduled to hear the case on December 2.<\/p>\n<p>The case has attracted attention from a number of interested parties. <a href=\"http:\/\/www.americanbar.org\/content\/dam\/aba\/publications\/supreme_court_preview\/briefs-v3\/12-138_resp_amcu_ppi.authcheckdam.pdf\">\u201cProfessors and Practitioners of Arbitration Law\u201d<\/a>\u00a0filed an amicus brief in favor of Respondents arguing that the BIT was only a conditional offer by Argentina to agree to arbitration, and that the condition\u2014the 18-month requirement\u2014was not met. Also, although the arbitrators could decide on jurisdiction \u201c<i>in the first instance<\/i>,\u201d their \u201cdecision was subject to <i>de novo<\/i> review by the court.\u201d <a href=\"http:\/\/sblog.s3.amazonaws.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/84\/2013\/09\/12-138-tsac-United-States.pdf\">The <\/a><a href=\"http:\/\/sblog.s3.amazonaws.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/84\/2013\/09\/12-138-tsac-United-States.pdf\">United States government<\/a>\u00a0and <a href=\"http:\/\/sblog.s3.amazonaws.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/84\/2013\/11\/No-12-138bsacTheRepublicof-Ecuador.pdf\">the Republic of Ecuador<\/a>\u00a0joined in this sentiment, and <a href=\"http:\/\/www.americanbar.org\/content\/dam\/aba\/publications\/supreme_court_preview\/briefs-v3\/12-138_resp.authcheckdam.pdf\">Respondent has largely adopted these positions.<b><b><br \/>\n<\/b><\/b><\/a><\/p>\n<p>On the other hand, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.americanbar.org\/content\/dam\/aba\/publications\/supreme_court_preview\/briefs-v2\/12-138_pet_amcu_aaa.authcheckdam.pdf\">the American Arbitration Association<\/a>\u00a0raised concerns about the future of international arbitration in the United States if the \u201ccost and efficiency benefits of arbitration are undermined by judicial intrusion,\u201d and if the Court disregards expert findings by \u201ceminent arbitrators.\u201d <a href=\"http:\/\/www.americanbar.org\/content\/dam\/aba\/publications\/supreme_court_preview\/briefs-v2\/12-138_pet_amcu_uscib.authcheckdam.pdf\">The United States Council for International Business<b>\u00a0<\/b><\/a>added to this view by arguing that allowing judges to rule on issues of jurisdiction would be ignoring the parties\u2019 consent to the rules of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL Rules), which \u201cexplicitly vest\u201d jurisdictional decisions in arbitrators. <a href=\"http:\/\/sblog.s3.amazonaws.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/84\/2013\/09\/BG-v-Argentina-Merits-Brief-Ok-to-Print.pdf\">The Plaintiffs\u2019 own arguments are largely in line with these positions.<b><b><br \/>\n<\/b><\/b><\/a><\/p>\n<p>Regardless of the interest surrounding the case, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.paulhastings.com\/Resources\/Upload\/Publications\/U_S__Supreme_Court_to_Hear_an_International_Investment_Treaty_Arbitration_Case.pdf\">the long-term significance of the case<\/a>\u00a0will likely depend on whether the Court \u201cclarif[ies] what constitutes [] \u2018procedural arbitrability\u2019\u201d or simply decides whether \u201ccompliance with <i>certain [(pre-)]<\/i><i>conditions<\/i> to arbitration\u201d (emphasis added)\u2014namely, the 18-month requirement specific to the Britain-Argentina BIT\u2014is for an arbitrator or a judge to decide. At the very least, however, this case will remain relevant as the first U.S. Supreme Court ruling on international <i>investment<\/i> arbitration, even if the Court <a href=\"http:\/\/www.porterwright.com\/files\/upload\/ButlandBusinessSuit2013.pdf\">adopts domestic or commercial arbitration principles,<b>\u00a0<\/b><\/a>already addressed in cases such as <a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=7982447248869908956&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=6&amp;as_vis=1&amp;oi=scholarr\"><i>Howsam v. Dean Witter Reynolds,\u00a0<\/i><i>Inc.<\/i><\/a>,\u00a0in reaching the decision.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Posted by Kylie Kim \u2013 November 26, 2013 @ 01:11 In January of last year, the D.C. Circuit ruled on [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":7122,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"site-sidebar-layout":"default","site-content-layout":"","ast-site-content-layout":"default","site-content-style":"default","site-sidebar-style":"default","ast-global-header-display":"","ast-banner-title-visibility":"","ast-main-header-display":"","ast-hfb-above-header-display":"","ast-hfb-below-header-display":"","ast-hfb-mobile-header-display":"","site-post-title":"","ast-breadcrumbs-content":"","ast-featured-img":"","footer-sml-layout":"","ast-disable-related-posts":"","theme-transparent-header-meta":"","adv-header-id-meta":"","stick-header-meta":"","header-above-stick-meta":"","header-main-stick-meta":"","header-below-stick-meta":"","astra-migrate-meta-layouts":"default","ast-page-background-enabled":"default","ast-page-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"ast-content-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_FSMCFIC_featured_image_caption":"","_FSMCFIC_featured_image_nocaption":"","_FSMCFIC_featured_image_hide":"","_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[125],"tags":[228,146,169,168,227,279,226,108,195,229],"class_list":["post-7121","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-digest","tag-american-arbitration-association","tag-arbitral-tribunals","tag-arbitration","tag-argentina","tag-d-c-circuit","tag-digest","tag-investment-arbitration","tag-scotus","tag-uncitral","tag-united-states-council-for-international-business"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/ilj\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/84\/2013\/12\/Kim_1311262-e1386052087686.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/peZu3S-1QR","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/ilj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7121","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/ilj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/ilj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/ilj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/ilj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7121"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/ilj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7121\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/ilj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/7122"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/ilj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7121"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/ilj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7121"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/ilj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7121"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}