|
|
Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can change, and the wisdom to know the difference.” This wish of Emperor Marcus Aurelius in his Meditations could also be that of the practitioners of international arbitration in the face of the Covid-19 pandemic. Indeed, new questions arise and, with them, the challenge of the sustainability of international arbitration. 1. What impact does Covid-19 have on the way we work? This first question, shared by many professions, arises on three levels. Individually, with the transfer of our professional space to our private space. It is no longer space that defines professional time but connected time that defines professional space. This is not new as we are used to traveling and working with moving teams internationally. What is new is the exclusivity of this operating mode. We can no longer choose to have certain moments remotely and others in person.
How to resist the unification of professional and personal time imposed by the unification of space? Relationships within our teams are also affected by social distancing. How can we adapt the way we communicate, manage people and projects, evaluate and are evaluated? How to maintain the added value necessary to exist in organizations that will seek to rationalize the management of their workforce remotely? Will the obligation to work DM Databases with fewer continuous resources contribute to a renaissance and increase in productivity? Will we be more inclined to train in new tools, especially computing and artificial intelligence? Among arbitration actors, the first problem is relationships with clients. How to ensure a business and trust relationship only by video or telephone, and going further, how to initiate such relationships through these only vectors? How can we imagine the confinement of a profession whose commercial essence is nourished by social interactions? With respect to relations with arbitral tribunals and arbitration institutions, the key issue is that of the audience.
Does a video hearing create a risk to legal certainty or, on the contrary, does it provide a new solution to resolve disputes after it has become physically impossible? Could the “virtualization” of the arbitration rites identified by Professor Gaillard (the hearings, but also the “great arbitration masses”) weaken or strengthen their symbolic power? 1 2. What impact does Covid-19 have on the nature of our work? For economic reasons, parties to litigation or arbitration may choose to seek amicable solutions to resolve their disputes, such as mediation or negotiation. At a minimum, will staged dispute resolution clauses (mediation or negotiation/arbitration) systematically replace traditional arbitration clauses? On the other hand, domestic arbitration could be developed as an alternative to the paralysis of state courts for current and future litigation. Will an increase in trade disputes fuel comparative law on exceptions to contractual performance.
|
|
發表於 16:35:49