Promoting the Education of Legal Professionals for International Arbitration in China--The 15th CIETAC Cup Had Record Number of New Participants

On November 20 to 24, 2017, the 15th CIETAC CUP International Commercial Arbitration Moot Court Competition, hosted by the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission （CIETAC）, was held in Beijing. Wang Chengjie,

Handling Corruption in International Commercial Arbitration

Corruption is defined as abuse of entrusted power for private gain.~①Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index 2014 shows that among 175 countries/territories in the world,"not one single country gets a perfect score and more than two-thirds score below50,on a scale from 0(highly corrupt)to 100(very clean)".~②The sectors most seriously affected by corruption include public procurement,construction and estate,energy,pharmaceutical and health care,transportation,etc.

On the Eve of the Enforcement of the Arbitration Law——An interview with Xu Dayou, vice-chairman of China Council for the Promotion of International Trade and of the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission

The Arbitration Law of the People’s Republic of China will go into effect on September 1, 1995, which has become the focus of world attention. This is an important law promulgated by China for handling economic disputes. All the parties concerned are making intense preparations for the successful enforcement of the Law. As the first nongovernmental organisation engaged in arbitration affairs, the China Council

China Academy of Arbitration Law First Publishes China International Commercial Arbitration Annual Report

At the regular news press held by China Council for the Promotion of International Trade(CCPIT) held on September 22,China Academy of Arbitration Law officially published China International Commercial Arbitration Annual Report (2014).This is the first report released

Principles of Burden and Standards of Proof in Investor-state Arbitration

The discretionary decisions can affect the factual conclusions and hence result in unfairness to one party in a particular case.Understanding that tribunals are always bound to conduct the procedure fairly and within the limits of certain public policy,a careful examination of these principles to ensure the tribunals staying in course should be warranted.The development of evidentiary rules in investor-state arbitration is bifurcated.On the one hand,significant development has been made with respect to the rules of the taking of evidence as a result of the practice of international tribunals and by various codification efforts.On the other hand,lack of systematic and concrete rules binding tribunals on the exercises of determination of facts,allocating burden of proof and weighing of probative value of evidence makes the result of fact-finding unpredictable,inconsistent and sometimes even arbitrary.International tribunals have considerable discretion in dealing with presented evidence by applying the evidentiary rules they consider fit.This article reviews the principles relating to burden and standard of proof as reflected in international investor-state arbitration.Significant divergences can be discerned in practice.However,this author does not believe that introducing specific and binding evidentiary rules is a solution,considering the fundamental differences between arbitration and litigation.What the author advocates is the development of some guideline rules to ensure greater certainty,while preserving the flexibility of the arbitral process.The balance aims to achieve a level of"guided flexibility"to reduce uncertainties in factual decisions and to endow the less-experienced tribunals with some guidance.