BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//Maxwell Chambers - ECPv6.2.8.1//NONSGML v1.0//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
X-ORIGINAL-URL:https://www.maxwellchambers.com
X-WR-CALDESC:Events for Maxwell Chambers
REFRESH-INTERVAL;VALUE=DURATION:PT1H
X-Robots-Tag:noindex
X-PUBLISHED-TTL:PT1H
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:Asia/Singapore
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0800
TZOFFSETTO:+0800
TZNAME:+08
DTSTART:20250101T000000
END:STANDARD
TZID:Europe/Paris
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0100
TZOFFSETTO:+0200
TZNAME:CEST
DTSTART:20260329T010000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0200
TZOFFSETTO:+0100
TZNAME:CET
DTSTART:20261025T010000
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20250815
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20250816
DTSTAMP:20260620T115839
CREATED:20250815T084426Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250815T084426Z
UID:10000677-1755216000-1755302399@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:[Ep 5] Maxwell in the Multiverse: Sarah Grimmer
DESCRIPTION:Event Details		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Maxwell Conversations: Managing Public Policy | 29 August 2024		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n				\n				\n							Maxwell Conversations features leading personalities at the top of the international dispute resolution industry. These events seek to challenge assumptions with a deeper examination of the issues. Synposis  Public policy is an important element in determining the arbitrability of a dispute\, and also a ground on which an award may be annulled or refused enforcement. It has often been said that the public policy should be construed narrowly in keeping with the pro-arbitration policy of the New York Convention or the UNCITRAL Model Law. Held as part of Singapore Convention Week\, this session of Maxwell Conversations focused on the crucial role of public policy in international arbitration. The discussion highlighted how public policy influences the arbitrability of disputes and serves as grounds for annulling or refusing the enforcement of an award. While it is commonly understood that public policy should be interpreted narrowly\, aligning with the pro-arbitration stance of the New York Convention and UNCITRAL Model Law\, the event also shed light on less frequently discussed topics. The panel explored the importance of arbitrator independence and seat court review\, which are considered part of the “international public policy” of arbitration. This was contrasted with how courts may enforce annulled awards if they deem the annulment contrary to their own national public policy\, touching on issues like crime\, corruption\, or sovereignty. The discussion raised important questions about whether international and national public policies are opposing forces or if enforcing courts should consider multiple layers of public policy\, including the public policies of the governing law\, the seat of arbitration\, and how to navigate conflicts between these different frameworks. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n				\n				\n							The books referenced by Michael at the start of the session are: \n\nThe Public Policy Exception under the New York Convention\, Second Edition by Anton G. Maurer\nICCA’s Guide to the Interpretation of the 1958 New York Convention\, Second Edition\nGuide on the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards\, New York 1958 by the UNCITRAL Secretariat\n\nAdditional reference materials include: \n\nRe-calibration of curial intervention in public policy challenges against arbitral awards” written by Darius Chan and Elias Ngai of the Singapore Management University in the Journal of International Arbitration\n						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Q&A from the Lecture:		\n				\n				\n				\n							Q1: What are the potential challenges in the future for issuing arbitral awards? Are there any changes in environment or technology that may mitigate or worsen these challenges? \nQ2: What aspects of arbitration are ready for AI? \nQ3: What do you think are the key issues that need to be considered when using technology? \nQ4: About diversity\, I notice that the ICC now has an almost 50/50 male/female mix. Is this too fast and too artificial? \nQ5: For operating with ICC arbitration\, since the publishing of the ICC arbitration rules 2021 in the year of 2021\, which part of the arbitration rules 2021 would ICC suggest multi-national companies\, future expert witnesses\, future party representatives and future arbitrators to pay attention to as per ICC’s observation so far? \nQ6: What would ICC like expert witnesses\, party representatives\, and arbitrators to do (and prepare themselves) in order to operate ICC arbitration in line with ICC’s vision?  						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Watch the full recorded session below:		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										29 August 2024\, Thursday \n									\n								\n											\n													\n										8.00 am – 9:30 am (GMT+8)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										Singapore\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Organiser: Maxwell Chambers\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Format: Hybrid (In-person at Maxwell Chambers\, Online over Zoom)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																\n															\n															\n				\n				\n				\n					\n			\n							\n								\n							\n						\n				\n					CategoryFee (SGD)				\n			\n					\n					\n				\n			YouTube Livestreaming TicketFreeZoom Webinar Ticket$30*		\n					\n		\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Speakers		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Dr Michael Hwang		\n				\n				\n				\n							Dr Michael Hwang S.C. currently practises as an international arbitrator based in Singapore with a selective practice as Senior Counsel of the Supreme Court of Singapore. He served as the Chief Justice of the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) Courts from 2010 – 2018.   Dr Hwang’s other past appointments include: Judicial Commissioner of the Supreme Court of Singapore; Singapore’s Non-Resident Ambassador to Switzerland and Argentina; President of the Law Society of Singapore; Commissioner of the United Nations Compensation Commission; Vice Chairman of the ICC International Court of Arbitration; Vice President of the International Council of Commercial Arbitration (ICCA); and a Visiting (and later Adjunct) Professor of the National University of Singapore. He was educated at undergraduate and postgraduate levels at Oxford University\, where he won the Gordon Warter Scholarship from Pembroke College by open competitive examination. He has been conferred an Honorary LLD by the University of Sydney. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Jessica Fei		\n				\n				\n				\n							Jessica is a widely recognized leading international arbitration and dispute resolution specialist with close to 30 years’ experience working with international arbitration institutions and leading firms.  Constantly ranked and recommended by leading legal media including Chambers\, WWL\, Legal 500\, and ALB\, Jessica is one of the very few leading international arbitration practitioners (acting as counsel and arbitrator)  with dual qualifications (China and New York) as well as extensive cross-border dispute resolution experience between Chinese/Asian and Western parties. Jessica focuses her practice on international arbitration\, litigation and alternative disputes resolution. She sits regularly as arbitrator in commercial arbitration cases\, and is listed on the international arbitrator panels of the SIAC\, HKIAC\, CIETAC\, ICDR/AAA\, AIAC\, KCAB\, CEAC etc. Jessica is a court member of SIAC Court of Arbitration\, a member of the International/ Asia Advisory Committee of the AAA/ICDR\, a member of the CEAC Advisory Board\, VP of the UIA Litigation Committee and China Chapter Chair of NYSBA International Section. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Sae Youn Kim		\n				\n				\n				\n							Sae Youn Kim is a partner of the International Arbitration & Cross-Border Litigation Practice of Kim & Chang. Ms. Kim practices primarily in the areas of international litigation and arbitration with an emphasis on commercial and international law. Before joining Kim & Chang\, she served as a judge at various Korean district courts\, and practiced as a key member in major Korean law firms. Ms. Kim also sits as an arbitrator. Her expertise in international dispute resolution has been recognized by the variety of roles she holds and held in various institutions\, including but not limited to a Commissioner of the Korea Trade Commission\, a Vice-Chair of the Arbitration Committee of the International Bar Association\, a Co-Chair of the Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Committee of the Inter-Pacific Bar Association\, and a member of the ICC Court. She is regularly selected as leading lawyer by publications such as Chambers and Partners\, Who’s Who Legal\, Legal 500\, and Asian Legal Business. Ms. Kim received an LL.M. from Duke University Law School in 2007\, and her LL.B. from Seoul National University College of Law in 1991. She graduated the Judicial Training and Research Institute by the Supreme Court of Korea in 1994. She speaks and practices in both Korean and English. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Vijayendra Pratap Singh		\n				\n				\n				\n							With over 20 years of experience\, Vijayendra Pratap Singh heads the Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice in Delhi. Vijayendra represents clients in international\, commercial and domestic arbitrations; corporate and commercial litigation; regulatory practices and securities law. He has advised various government departments\, such as the Department of Economic Affairs\, Ministry of Finance; Securities and Exchange Board of India; Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation; the Ministry of Consumer Affairs\, etc.\, on the de-criminalisation of various Statutes and has been involved in various policy making initiatives of the Government of India. Vijayendra’s expertise span domestic and international arbitration\, as well as disputes in various fora in India\, ranging from shareholder disputes to corporate actions. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Lawrence Teh (Moderator)		\n				\n				\n				\n							Lawrence Teh is the Global Co-Head of Dentons’ International Arbitration practice and a senior partner in Dentons Rodyk’s Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice group. He is Co-Head of Dentons Rodyk’s International Arbitration and Shipping practice groups. He has particular experience in handling commercial disputes including those of international trade and commodities\, maritime and aviation\, banking and financial services\, onshore and offshore construction\, mergers\, acquisitions\, joint ventures and other investments\, and insurance. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Attendance Policy		\n				\n				\n				\n							Participants who wish to obtain CPD Points are reminded that they must comply strictly with the Attendance Policy set out in the CPD Guidelines. For participants attending the face-to-face activity\, this includes signing in on arrival and signing out at the conclusion of the activity in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being absent from the activity for more than 15 minutes. For those participating via the webinar\, this includes logging in at the start of the webinar and logging out at the conclusion of the webinar in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being away from the activity for more than 15 minutes. Participants who do not comply with the Attendance Policy will not be able to obtain CPD Points for attending the activity. Please refer to https://www.silecpdcentre.sg for more information. Practice Area: Alternative Dispute Resolution Training Category: General 						\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Earn 1 Public CPD Point		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Terms & Conditions		\n				\n				\n				\n							1) Registration – Limited slots are available on a first-come-first-served basis. 2) Consent to data collection – You consent for Maxwell Chambers and their partners to collect\, use and disclose the personal data that you provide in this form for marketing purposes\, including adding you to their mailing list for industry updates. The Organiser reserves the right to cancel or alter the content and timing of the programme or the identity of the speakers. In the event that the webinar is cancelled by the Organiser\, the participants will be notified prior to the webinar. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Share		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n								\n						\n															\n																Share on facebook\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on twitter\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on linkedin\n							\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on whatsapp\n							\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/maxwell-in-the-multiverse/#new_tab
LOCATION:Singapore
CATEGORIES:Happenings by Maxwell Chambers
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Maxwell-Chambers-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Singapore:20250825T090000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Singapore:20250825T103000
DTSTAMP:20260620T115840
CREATED:20250708T084421Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20260225T081850Z
UID:10000644-1756112400-1756117800@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:Singapore Arbitration Dialogue 2025
DESCRIPTION:Event Details		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Maxwell Conversations: Managing Public Policy | 29 August 2024		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n				\n				\n							Maxwell Conversations features leading personalities at the top of the international dispute resolution industry. These events seek to challenge assumptions with a deeper examination of the issues. Synposis  Public policy is an important element in determining the arbitrability of a dispute\, and also a ground on which an award may be annulled or refused enforcement. It has often been said that the public policy should be construed narrowly in keeping with the pro-arbitration policy of the New York Convention or the UNCITRAL Model Law. Held as part of Singapore Convention Week\, this session of Maxwell Conversations focused on the crucial role of public policy in international arbitration. The discussion highlighted how public policy influences the arbitrability of disputes and serves as grounds for annulling or refusing the enforcement of an award. While it is commonly understood that public policy should be interpreted narrowly\, aligning with the pro-arbitration stance of the New York Convention and UNCITRAL Model Law\, the event also shed light on less frequently discussed topics. The panel explored the importance of arbitrator independence and seat court review\, which are considered part of the “international public policy” of arbitration. This was contrasted with how courts may enforce annulled awards if they deem the annulment contrary to their own national public policy\, touching on issues like crime\, corruption\, or sovereignty. The discussion raised important questions about whether international and national public policies are opposing forces or if enforcing courts should consider multiple layers of public policy\, including the public policies of the governing law\, the seat of arbitration\, and how to navigate conflicts between these different frameworks. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n				\n				\n							The books referenced by Michael at the start of the session are: \n\nThe Public Policy Exception under the New York Convention\, Second Edition by Anton G. Maurer\nICCA’s Guide to the Interpretation of the 1958 New York Convention\, Second Edition\nGuide on the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards\, New York 1958 by the UNCITRAL Secretariat\n\nAdditional reference materials include: \n\nRe-calibration of curial intervention in public policy challenges against arbitral awards” written by Darius Chan and Elias Ngai of the Singapore Management University in the Journal of International Arbitration\n						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Q&A from the Lecture:		\n				\n				\n				\n							Q1: What are the potential challenges in the future for issuing arbitral awards? Are there any changes in environment or technology that may mitigate or worsen these challenges? \nQ2: What aspects of arbitration are ready for AI? \nQ3: What do you think are the key issues that need to be considered when using technology? \nQ4: About diversity\, I notice that the ICC now has an almost 50/50 male/female mix. Is this too fast and too artificial? \nQ5: For operating with ICC arbitration\, since the publishing of the ICC arbitration rules 2021 in the year of 2021\, which part of the arbitration rules 2021 would ICC suggest multi-national companies\, future expert witnesses\, future party representatives and future arbitrators to pay attention to as per ICC’s observation so far? \nQ6: What would ICC like expert witnesses\, party representatives\, and arbitrators to do (and prepare themselves) in order to operate ICC arbitration in line with ICC’s vision?  						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Watch the full recorded session below:		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										29 August 2024\, Thursday \n									\n								\n											\n													\n										8.00 am – 9:30 am (GMT+8)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										Singapore\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Organiser: Maxwell Chambers\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Format: Hybrid (In-person at Maxwell Chambers\, Online over Zoom)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																\n															\n															\n				\n				\n				\n					\n			\n							\n								\n							\n						\n				\n					CategoryFee (SGD)				\n			\n					\n					\n				\n			YouTube Livestreaming TicketFreeZoom Webinar Ticket$30*		\n					\n		\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Speakers		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Dr Michael Hwang		\n				\n				\n				\n							Dr Michael Hwang S.C. currently practises as an international arbitrator based in Singapore with a selective practice as Senior Counsel of the Supreme Court of Singapore. He served as the Chief Justice of the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) Courts from 2010 – 2018.   Dr Hwang’s other past appointments include: Judicial Commissioner of the Supreme Court of Singapore; Singapore’s Non-Resident Ambassador to Switzerland and Argentina; President of the Law Society of Singapore; Commissioner of the United Nations Compensation Commission; Vice Chairman of the ICC International Court of Arbitration; Vice President of the International Council of Commercial Arbitration (ICCA); and a Visiting (and later Adjunct) Professor of the National University of Singapore. He was educated at undergraduate and postgraduate levels at Oxford University\, where he won the Gordon Warter Scholarship from Pembroke College by open competitive examination. He has been conferred an Honorary LLD by the University of Sydney. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Jessica Fei		\n				\n				\n				\n							Jessica is a widely recognized leading international arbitration and dispute resolution specialist with close to 30 years’ experience working with international arbitration institutions and leading firms.  Constantly ranked and recommended by leading legal media including Chambers\, WWL\, Legal 500\, and ALB\, Jessica is one of the very few leading international arbitration practitioners (acting as counsel and arbitrator)  with dual qualifications (China and New York) as well as extensive cross-border dispute resolution experience between Chinese/Asian and Western parties. Jessica focuses her practice on international arbitration\, litigation and alternative disputes resolution. She sits regularly as arbitrator in commercial arbitration cases\, and is listed on the international arbitrator panels of the SIAC\, HKIAC\, CIETAC\, ICDR/AAA\, AIAC\, KCAB\, CEAC etc. Jessica is a court member of SIAC Court of Arbitration\, a member of the International/ Asia Advisory Committee of the AAA/ICDR\, a member of the CEAC Advisory Board\, VP of the UIA Litigation Committee and China Chapter Chair of NYSBA International Section. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Sae Youn Kim		\n				\n				\n				\n							Sae Youn Kim is a partner of the International Arbitration & Cross-Border Litigation Practice of Kim & Chang. Ms. Kim practices primarily in the areas of international litigation and arbitration with an emphasis on commercial and international law. Before joining Kim & Chang\, she served as a judge at various Korean district courts\, and practiced as a key member in major Korean law firms. Ms. Kim also sits as an arbitrator. Her expertise in international dispute resolution has been recognized by the variety of roles she holds and held in various institutions\, including but not limited to a Commissioner of the Korea Trade Commission\, a Vice-Chair of the Arbitration Committee of the International Bar Association\, a Co-Chair of the Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Committee of the Inter-Pacific Bar Association\, and a member of the ICC Court. She is regularly selected as leading lawyer by publications such as Chambers and Partners\, Who’s Who Legal\, Legal 500\, and Asian Legal Business. Ms. Kim received an LL.M. from Duke University Law School in 2007\, and her LL.B. from Seoul National University College of Law in 1991. She graduated the Judicial Training and Research Institute by the Supreme Court of Korea in 1994. She speaks and practices in both Korean and English. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Vijayendra Pratap Singh		\n				\n				\n				\n							With over 20 years of experience\, Vijayendra Pratap Singh heads the Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice in Delhi. Vijayendra represents clients in international\, commercial and domestic arbitrations; corporate and commercial litigation; regulatory practices and securities law. He has advised various government departments\, such as the Department of Economic Affairs\, Ministry of Finance; Securities and Exchange Board of India; Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation; the Ministry of Consumer Affairs\, etc.\, on the de-criminalisation of various Statutes and has been involved in various policy making initiatives of the Government of India. Vijayendra’s expertise span domestic and international arbitration\, as well as disputes in various fora in India\, ranging from shareholder disputes to corporate actions. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Lawrence Teh (Moderator)		\n				\n				\n				\n							Lawrence Teh is the Global Co-Head of Dentons’ International Arbitration practice and a senior partner in Dentons Rodyk’s Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice group. He is Co-Head of Dentons Rodyk’s International Arbitration and Shipping practice groups. He has particular experience in handling commercial disputes including those of international trade and commodities\, maritime and aviation\, banking and financial services\, onshore and offshore construction\, mergers\, acquisitions\, joint ventures and other investments\, and insurance. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Attendance Policy		\n				\n				\n				\n							Participants who wish to obtain CPD Points are reminded that they must comply strictly with the Attendance Policy set out in the CPD Guidelines. For participants attending the face-to-face activity\, this includes signing in on arrival and signing out at the conclusion of the activity in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being absent from the activity for more than 15 minutes. For those participating via the webinar\, this includes logging in at the start of the webinar and logging out at the conclusion of the webinar in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being away from the activity for more than 15 minutes. Participants who do not comply with the Attendance Policy will not be able to obtain CPD Points for attending the activity. Please refer to https://www.silecpdcentre.sg for more information. Practice Area: Alternative Dispute Resolution Training Category: General 						\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Earn 1 Public CPD Point		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Terms & Conditions		\n				\n				\n				\n							1) Registration – Limited slots are available on a first-come-first-served basis. 2) Consent to data collection – You consent for Maxwell Chambers and their partners to collect\, use and disclose the personal data that you provide in this form for marketing purposes\, including adding you to their mailing list for industry updates. The Organiser reserves the right to cancel or alter the content and timing of the programme or the identity of the speakers. In the event that the webinar is cancelled by the Organiser\, the participants will be notified prior to the webinar. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Share		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n								\n						\n															\n																Share on facebook\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on twitter\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on linkedin\n							\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on whatsapp\n							\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/event/singapore-arbitration-dialogue-2025/
LOCATION:Singapore
CATEGORIES:Happenings by Maxwell Chambers,Seminar
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/SAD-2025_cover_img.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Singapore:20250828T110000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Singapore:20250828T130000
DTSTAMP:20260620T115840
CREATED:20250725T073100Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250725T073651Z
UID:10000660-1756378800-1756386000@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:From AI to Drones: Leveraging Next-Gen Tech in Arbitration
DESCRIPTION:Event Details		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Maxwell Conversations: Managing Public Policy | 29 August 2024		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n				\n				\n							Maxwell Conversations features leading personalities at the top of the international dispute resolution industry. These events seek to challenge assumptions with a deeper examination of the issues. Synposis  Public policy is an important element in determining the arbitrability of a dispute\, and also a ground on which an award may be annulled or refused enforcement. It has often been said that the public policy should be construed narrowly in keeping with the pro-arbitration policy of the New York Convention or the UNCITRAL Model Law. Held as part of Singapore Convention Week\, this session of Maxwell Conversations focused on the crucial role of public policy in international arbitration. The discussion highlighted how public policy influences the arbitrability of disputes and serves as grounds for annulling or refusing the enforcement of an award. While it is commonly understood that public policy should be interpreted narrowly\, aligning with the pro-arbitration stance of the New York Convention and UNCITRAL Model Law\, the event also shed light on less frequently discussed topics. The panel explored the importance of arbitrator independence and seat court review\, which are considered part of the “international public policy” of arbitration. This was contrasted with how courts may enforce annulled awards if they deem the annulment contrary to their own national public policy\, touching on issues like crime\, corruption\, or sovereignty. The discussion raised important questions about whether international and national public policies are opposing forces or if enforcing courts should consider multiple layers of public policy\, including the public policies of the governing law\, the seat of arbitration\, and how to navigate conflicts between these different frameworks. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n				\n				\n							The books referenced by Michael at the start of the session are: \n\nThe Public Policy Exception under the New York Convention\, Second Edition by Anton G. Maurer\nICCA’s Guide to the Interpretation of the 1958 New York Convention\, Second Edition\nGuide on the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards\, New York 1958 by the UNCITRAL Secretariat\n\nAdditional reference materials include: \n\nRe-calibration of curial intervention in public policy challenges against arbitral awards” written by Darius Chan and Elias Ngai of the Singapore Management University in the Journal of International Arbitration\n						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Q&A from the Lecture:		\n				\n				\n				\n							Q1: What are the potential challenges in the future for issuing arbitral awards? Are there any changes in environment or technology that may mitigate or worsen these challenges? \nQ2: What aspects of arbitration are ready for AI? \nQ3: What do you think are the key issues that need to be considered when using technology? \nQ4: About diversity\, I notice that the ICC now has an almost 50/50 male/female mix. Is this too fast and too artificial? \nQ5: For operating with ICC arbitration\, since the publishing of the ICC arbitration rules 2021 in the year of 2021\, which part of the arbitration rules 2021 would ICC suggest multi-national companies\, future expert witnesses\, future party representatives and future arbitrators to pay attention to as per ICC’s observation so far? \nQ6: What would ICC like expert witnesses\, party representatives\, and arbitrators to do (and prepare themselves) in order to operate ICC arbitration in line with ICC’s vision?  						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Watch the full recorded session below:		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										29 August 2024\, Thursday \n									\n								\n											\n													\n										8.00 am – 9:30 am (GMT+8)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										Singapore\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Organiser: Maxwell Chambers\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Format: Hybrid (In-person at Maxwell Chambers\, Online over Zoom)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																\n															\n															\n				\n				\n				\n					\n			\n							\n								\n							\n						\n				\n					CategoryFee (SGD)				\n			\n					\n					\n				\n			YouTube Livestreaming TicketFreeZoom Webinar Ticket$30*		\n					\n		\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Speakers		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Dr Michael Hwang		\n				\n				\n				\n							Dr Michael Hwang S.C. currently practises as an international arbitrator based in Singapore with a selective practice as Senior Counsel of the Supreme Court of Singapore. He served as the Chief Justice of the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) Courts from 2010 – 2018.   Dr Hwang’s other past appointments include: Judicial Commissioner of the Supreme Court of Singapore; Singapore’s Non-Resident Ambassador to Switzerland and Argentina; President of the Law Society of Singapore; Commissioner of the United Nations Compensation Commission; Vice Chairman of the ICC International Court of Arbitration; Vice President of the International Council of Commercial Arbitration (ICCA); and a Visiting (and later Adjunct) Professor of the National University of Singapore. He was educated at undergraduate and postgraduate levels at Oxford University\, where he won the Gordon Warter Scholarship from Pembroke College by open competitive examination. He has been conferred an Honorary LLD by the University of Sydney. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Jessica Fei		\n				\n				\n				\n							Jessica is a widely recognized leading international arbitration and dispute resolution specialist with close to 30 years’ experience working with international arbitration institutions and leading firms.  Constantly ranked and recommended by leading legal media including Chambers\, WWL\, Legal 500\, and ALB\, Jessica is one of the very few leading international arbitration practitioners (acting as counsel and arbitrator)  with dual qualifications (China and New York) as well as extensive cross-border dispute resolution experience between Chinese/Asian and Western parties. Jessica focuses her practice on international arbitration\, litigation and alternative disputes resolution. She sits regularly as arbitrator in commercial arbitration cases\, and is listed on the international arbitrator panels of the SIAC\, HKIAC\, CIETAC\, ICDR/AAA\, AIAC\, KCAB\, CEAC etc. Jessica is a court member of SIAC Court of Arbitration\, a member of the International/ Asia Advisory Committee of the AAA/ICDR\, a member of the CEAC Advisory Board\, VP of the UIA Litigation Committee and China Chapter Chair of NYSBA International Section. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Sae Youn Kim		\n				\n				\n				\n							Sae Youn Kim is a partner of the International Arbitration & Cross-Border Litigation Practice of Kim & Chang. Ms. Kim practices primarily in the areas of international litigation and arbitration with an emphasis on commercial and international law. Before joining Kim & Chang\, she served as a judge at various Korean district courts\, and practiced as a key member in major Korean law firms. Ms. Kim also sits as an arbitrator. Her expertise in international dispute resolution has been recognized by the variety of roles she holds and held in various institutions\, including but not limited to a Commissioner of the Korea Trade Commission\, a Vice-Chair of the Arbitration Committee of the International Bar Association\, a Co-Chair of the Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Committee of the Inter-Pacific Bar Association\, and a member of the ICC Court. She is regularly selected as leading lawyer by publications such as Chambers and Partners\, Who’s Who Legal\, Legal 500\, and Asian Legal Business. Ms. Kim received an LL.M. from Duke University Law School in 2007\, and her LL.B. from Seoul National University College of Law in 1991. She graduated the Judicial Training and Research Institute by the Supreme Court of Korea in 1994. She speaks and practices in both Korean and English. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Vijayendra Pratap Singh		\n				\n				\n				\n							With over 20 years of experience\, Vijayendra Pratap Singh heads the Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice in Delhi. Vijayendra represents clients in international\, commercial and domestic arbitrations; corporate and commercial litigation; regulatory practices and securities law. He has advised various government departments\, such as the Department of Economic Affairs\, Ministry of Finance; Securities and Exchange Board of India; Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation; the Ministry of Consumer Affairs\, etc.\, on the de-criminalisation of various Statutes and has been involved in various policy making initiatives of the Government of India. Vijayendra’s expertise span domestic and international arbitration\, as well as disputes in various fora in India\, ranging from shareholder disputes to corporate actions. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Lawrence Teh (Moderator)		\n				\n				\n				\n							Lawrence Teh is the Global Co-Head of Dentons’ International Arbitration practice and a senior partner in Dentons Rodyk’s Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice group. He is Co-Head of Dentons Rodyk’s International Arbitration and Shipping practice groups. He has particular experience in handling commercial disputes including those of international trade and commodities\, maritime and aviation\, banking and financial services\, onshore and offshore construction\, mergers\, acquisitions\, joint ventures and other investments\, and insurance. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Attendance Policy		\n				\n				\n				\n							Participants who wish to obtain CPD Points are reminded that they must comply strictly with the Attendance Policy set out in the CPD Guidelines. For participants attending the face-to-face activity\, this includes signing in on arrival and signing out at the conclusion of the activity in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being absent from the activity for more than 15 minutes. For those participating via the webinar\, this includes logging in at the start of the webinar and logging out at the conclusion of the webinar in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being away from the activity for more than 15 minutes. Participants who do not comply with the Attendance Policy will not be able to obtain CPD Points for attending the activity. Please refer to https://www.silecpdcentre.sg for more information. Practice Area: Alternative Dispute Resolution Training Category: General 						\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Earn 1 Public CPD Point		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Terms & Conditions		\n				\n				\n				\n							1) Registration – Limited slots are available on a first-come-first-served basis. 2) Consent to data collection – You consent for Maxwell Chambers and their partners to collect\, use and disclose the personal data that you provide in this form for marketing purposes\, including adding you to their mailing list for industry updates. The Organiser reserves the right to cancel or alter the content and timing of the programme or the identity of the speakers. In the event that the webinar is cancelled by the Organiser\, the participants will be notified prior to the webinar. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Share		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n								\n						\n															\n																Share on facebook\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on twitter\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on linkedin\n							\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on whatsapp\n							\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://events.jusmundi.com/leveraging-next-gen-tech-to-build-the-winning-case#new_tab
LOCATION:Maxwell Chambers\, 32 Maxwell Road #03-01 Singapore 069115\, Singapore\, 069115\, Singapore
CATEGORIES:Happenings by Maxwell Chambers,Seminar
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Events-Featured-Image-30.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Singapore:20250829T073000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Singapore:20250829T093000
DTSTAMP:20260620T115841
CREATED:20250611T092219Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250722T041727Z
UID:10000630-1756452600-1756459800@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:Walk and Talk 2025
DESCRIPTION:Event Details		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Maxwell Conversations: Managing Public Policy | 29 August 2024		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n				\n				\n							Maxwell Conversations features leading personalities at the top of the international dispute resolution industry. These events seek to challenge assumptions with a deeper examination of the issues. Synposis  Public policy is an important element in determining the arbitrability of a dispute\, and also a ground on which an award may be annulled or refused enforcement. It has often been said that the public policy should be construed narrowly in keeping with the pro-arbitration policy of the New York Convention or the UNCITRAL Model Law. Held as part of Singapore Convention Week\, this session of Maxwell Conversations focused on the crucial role of public policy in international arbitration. The discussion highlighted how public policy influences the arbitrability of disputes and serves as grounds for annulling or refusing the enforcement of an award. While it is commonly understood that public policy should be interpreted narrowly\, aligning with the pro-arbitration stance of the New York Convention and UNCITRAL Model Law\, the event also shed light on less frequently discussed topics. The panel explored the importance of arbitrator independence and seat court review\, which are considered part of the “international public policy” of arbitration. This was contrasted with how courts may enforce annulled awards if they deem the annulment contrary to their own national public policy\, touching on issues like crime\, corruption\, or sovereignty. The discussion raised important questions about whether international and national public policies are opposing forces or if enforcing courts should consider multiple layers of public policy\, including the public policies of the governing law\, the seat of arbitration\, and how to navigate conflicts between these different frameworks. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n				\n				\n							The books referenced by Michael at the start of the session are: \n\nThe Public Policy Exception under the New York Convention\, Second Edition by Anton G. Maurer\nICCA’s Guide to the Interpretation of the 1958 New York Convention\, Second Edition\nGuide on the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards\, New York 1958 by the UNCITRAL Secretariat\n\nAdditional reference materials include: \n\nRe-calibration of curial intervention in public policy challenges against arbitral awards” written by Darius Chan and Elias Ngai of the Singapore Management University in the Journal of International Arbitration\n						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Q&A from the Lecture:		\n				\n				\n				\n							Q1: What are the potential challenges in the future for issuing arbitral awards? Are there any changes in environment or technology that may mitigate or worsen these challenges? \nQ2: What aspects of arbitration are ready for AI? \nQ3: What do you think are the key issues that need to be considered when using technology? \nQ4: About diversity\, I notice that the ICC now has an almost 50/50 male/female mix. Is this too fast and too artificial? \nQ5: For operating with ICC arbitration\, since the publishing of the ICC arbitration rules 2021 in the year of 2021\, which part of the arbitration rules 2021 would ICC suggest multi-national companies\, future expert witnesses\, future party representatives and future arbitrators to pay attention to as per ICC’s observation so far? \nQ6: What would ICC like expert witnesses\, party representatives\, and arbitrators to do (and prepare themselves) in order to operate ICC arbitration in line with ICC’s vision?  						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Watch the full recorded session below:		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										29 August 2024\, Thursday \n									\n								\n											\n													\n										8.00 am – 9:30 am (GMT+8)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										Singapore\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Organiser: Maxwell Chambers\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Format: Hybrid (In-person at Maxwell Chambers\, Online over Zoom)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																\n															\n															\n				\n				\n				\n					\n			\n							\n								\n							\n						\n				\n					CategoryFee (SGD)				\n			\n					\n					\n				\n			YouTube Livestreaming TicketFreeZoom Webinar Ticket$30*		\n					\n		\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Speakers		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Dr Michael Hwang		\n				\n				\n				\n							Dr Michael Hwang S.C. currently practises as an international arbitrator based in Singapore with a selective practice as Senior Counsel of the Supreme Court of Singapore. He served as the Chief Justice of the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) Courts from 2010 – 2018.   Dr Hwang’s other past appointments include: Judicial Commissioner of the Supreme Court of Singapore; Singapore’s Non-Resident Ambassador to Switzerland and Argentina; President of the Law Society of Singapore; Commissioner of the United Nations Compensation Commission; Vice Chairman of the ICC International Court of Arbitration; Vice President of the International Council of Commercial Arbitration (ICCA); and a Visiting (and later Adjunct) Professor of the National University of Singapore. He was educated at undergraduate and postgraduate levels at Oxford University\, where he won the Gordon Warter Scholarship from Pembroke College by open competitive examination. He has been conferred an Honorary LLD by the University of Sydney. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Jessica Fei		\n				\n				\n				\n							Jessica is a widely recognized leading international arbitration and dispute resolution specialist with close to 30 years’ experience working with international arbitration institutions and leading firms.  Constantly ranked and recommended by leading legal media including Chambers\, WWL\, Legal 500\, and ALB\, Jessica is one of the very few leading international arbitration practitioners (acting as counsel and arbitrator)  with dual qualifications (China and New York) as well as extensive cross-border dispute resolution experience between Chinese/Asian and Western parties. Jessica focuses her practice on international arbitration\, litigation and alternative disputes resolution. She sits regularly as arbitrator in commercial arbitration cases\, and is listed on the international arbitrator panels of the SIAC\, HKIAC\, CIETAC\, ICDR/AAA\, AIAC\, KCAB\, CEAC etc. Jessica is a court member of SIAC Court of Arbitration\, a member of the International/ Asia Advisory Committee of the AAA/ICDR\, a member of the CEAC Advisory Board\, VP of the UIA Litigation Committee and China Chapter Chair of NYSBA International Section. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Sae Youn Kim		\n				\n				\n				\n							Sae Youn Kim is a partner of the International Arbitration & Cross-Border Litigation Practice of Kim & Chang. Ms. Kim practices primarily in the areas of international litigation and arbitration with an emphasis on commercial and international law. Before joining Kim & Chang\, she served as a judge at various Korean district courts\, and practiced as a key member in major Korean law firms. Ms. Kim also sits as an arbitrator. Her expertise in international dispute resolution has been recognized by the variety of roles she holds and held in various institutions\, including but not limited to a Commissioner of the Korea Trade Commission\, a Vice-Chair of the Arbitration Committee of the International Bar Association\, a Co-Chair of the Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Committee of the Inter-Pacific Bar Association\, and a member of the ICC Court. She is regularly selected as leading lawyer by publications such as Chambers and Partners\, Who’s Who Legal\, Legal 500\, and Asian Legal Business. Ms. Kim received an LL.M. from Duke University Law School in 2007\, and her LL.B. from Seoul National University College of Law in 1991. She graduated the Judicial Training and Research Institute by the Supreme Court of Korea in 1994. She speaks and practices in both Korean and English. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Vijayendra Pratap Singh		\n				\n				\n				\n							With over 20 years of experience\, Vijayendra Pratap Singh heads the Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice in Delhi. Vijayendra represents clients in international\, commercial and domestic arbitrations; corporate and commercial litigation; regulatory practices and securities law. He has advised various government departments\, such as the Department of Economic Affairs\, Ministry of Finance; Securities and Exchange Board of India; Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation; the Ministry of Consumer Affairs\, etc.\, on the de-criminalisation of various Statutes and has been involved in various policy making initiatives of the Government of India. Vijayendra’s expertise span domestic and international arbitration\, as well as disputes in various fora in India\, ranging from shareholder disputes to corporate actions. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Lawrence Teh (Moderator)		\n				\n				\n				\n							Lawrence Teh is the Global Co-Head of Dentons’ International Arbitration practice and a senior partner in Dentons Rodyk’s Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice group. He is Co-Head of Dentons Rodyk’s International Arbitration and Shipping practice groups. He has particular experience in handling commercial disputes including those of international trade and commodities\, maritime and aviation\, banking and financial services\, onshore and offshore construction\, mergers\, acquisitions\, joint ventures and other investments\, and insurance. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Attendance Policy		\n				\n				\n				\n							Participants who wish to obtain CPD Points are reminded that they must comply strictly with the Attendance Policy set out in the CPD Guidelines. For participants attending the face-to-face activity\, this includes signing in on arrival and signing out at the conclusion of the activity in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being absent from the activity for more than 15 minutes. For those participating via the webinar\, this includes logging in at the start of the webinar and logging out at the conclusion of the webinar in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being away from the activity for more than 15 minutes. Participants who do not comply with the Attendance Policy will not be able to obtain CPD Points for attending the activity. Please refer to https://www.silecpdcentre.sg for more information. Practice Area: Alternative Dispute Resolution Training Category: General 						\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Earn 1 Public CPD Point		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Terms & Conditions		\n				\n				\n				\n							1) Registration – Limited slots are available on a first-come-first-served basis. 2) Consent to data collection – You consent for Maxwell Chambers and their partners to collect\, use and disclose the personal data that you provide in this form for marketing purposes\, including adding you to their mailing list for industry updates. The Organiser reserves the right to cancel or alter the content and timing of the programme or the identity of the speakers. In the event that the webinar is cancelled by the Organiser\, the participants will be notified prior to the webinar. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Share		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n								\n						\n															\n																Share on facebook\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on twitter\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on linkedin\n							\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on whatsapp\n							\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/event/walk-and-talk-2025/
LOCATION:Singapore
CATEGORIES:Happenings by Maxwell Chambers,Networking
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Maxwell-Chambers-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20251007
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20251008
DTSTAMP:20260620T115841
CREATED:20251009T064557Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20251009T064848Z
UID:10000711-1759795200-1759881599@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:5 Questions With Maxwell Interview Series: Christine Falcicchio\, Global Co-Chair of the Campaign for Greener Arbitrations.
DESCRIPTION:Event Details		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Maxwell Conversations: Managing Public Policy | 29 August 2024		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n				\n				\n							Maxwell Conversations features leading personalities at the top of the international dispute resolution industry. These events seek to challenge assumptions with a deeper examination of the issues. Synposis  Public policy is an important element in determining the arbitrability of a dispute\, and also a ground on which an award may be annulled or refused enforcement. It has often been said that the public policy should be construed narrowly in keeping with the pro-arbitration policy of the New York Convention or the UNCITRAL Model Law. Held as part of Singapore Convention Week\, this session of Maxwell Conversations focused on the crucial role of public policy in international arbitration. The discussion highlighted how public policy influences the arbitrability of disputes and serves as grounds for annulling or refusing the enforcement of an award. While it is commonly understood that public policy should be interpreted narrowly\, aligning with the pro-arbitration stance of the New York Convention and UNCITRAL Model Law\, the event also shed light on less frequently discussed topics. The panel explored the importance of arbitrator independence and seat court review\, which are considered part of the “international public policy” of arbitration. This was contrasted with how courts may enforce annulled awards if they deem the annulment contrary to their own national public policy\, touching on issues like crime\, corruption\, or sovereignty. The discussion raised important questions about whether international and national public policies are opposing forces or if enforcing courts should consider multiple layers of public policy\, including the public policies of the governing law\, the seat of arbitration\, and how to navigate conflicts between these different frameworks. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n				\n				\n							The books referenced by Michael at the start of the session are: \n\nThe Public Policy Exception under the New York Convention\, Second Edition by Anton G. Maurer\nICCA’s Guide to the Interpretation of the 1958 New York Convention\, Second Edition\nGuide on the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards\, New York 1958 by the UNCITRAL Secretariat\n\nAdditional reference materials include: \n\nRe-calibration of curial intervention in public policy challenges against arbitral awards” written by Darius Chan and Elias Ngai of the Singapore Management University in the Journal of International Arbitration\n						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Q&A from the Lecture:		\n				\n				\n				\n							Q1: What are the potential challenges in the future for issuing arbitral awards? Are there any changes in environment or technology that may mitigate or worsen these challenges? \nQ2: What aspects of arbitration are ready for AI? \nQ3: What do you think are the key issues that need to be considered when using technology? \nQ4: About diversity\, I notice that the ICC now has an almost 50/50 male/female mix. Is this too fast and too artificial? \nQ5: For operating with ICC arbitration\, since the publishing of the ICC arbitration rules 2021 in the year of 2021\, which part of the arbitration rules 2021 would ICC suggest multi-national companies\, future expert witnesses\, future party representatives and future arbitrators to pay attention to as per ICC’s observation so far? \nQ6: What would ICC like expert witnesses\, party representatives\, and arbitrators to do (and prepare themselves) in order to operate ICC arbitration in line with ICC’s vision?  						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Watch the full recorded session below:		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										29 August 2024\, Thursday \n									\n								\n											\n													\n										8.00 am – 9:30 am (GMT+8)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										Singapore\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Organiser: Maxwell Chambers\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Format: Hybrid (In-person at Maxwell Chambers\, Online over Zoom)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																\n															\n															\n				\n				\n				\n					\n			\n							\n								\n							\n						\n				\n					CategoryFee (SGD)				\n			\n					\n					\n				\n			YouTube Livestreaming TicketFreeZoom Webinar Ticket$30*		\n					\n		\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Speakers		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Dr Michael Hwang		\n				\n				\n				\n							Dr Michael Hwang S.C. currently practises as an international arbitrator based in Singapore with a selective practice as Senior Counsel of the Supreme Court of Singapore. He served as the Chief Justice of the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) Courts from 2010 – 2018.   Dr Hwang’s other past appointments include: Judicial Commissioner of the Supreme Court of Singapore; Singapore’s Non-Resident Ambassador to Switzerland and Argentina; President of the Law Society of Singapore; Commissioner of the United Nations Compensation Commission; Vice Chairman of the ICC International Court of Arbitration; Vice President of the International Council of Commercial Arbitration (ICCA); and a Visiting (and later Adjunct) Professor of the National University of Singapore. He was educated at undergraduate and postgraduate levels at Oxford University\, where he won the Gordon Warter Scholarship from Pembroke College by open competitive examination. He has been conferred an Honorary LLD by the University of Sydney. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Jessica Fei		\n				\n				\n				\n							Jessica is a widely recognized leading international arbitration and dispute resolution specialist with close to 30 years’ experience working with international arbitration institutions and leading firms.  Constantly ranked and recommended by leading legal media including Chambers\, WWL\, Legal 500\, and ALB\, Jessica is one of the very few leading international arbitration practitioners (acting as counsel and arbitrator)  with dual qualifications (China and New York) as well as extensive cross-border dispute resolution experience between Chinese/Asian and Western parties. Jessica focuses her practice on international arbitration\, litigation and alternative disputes resolution. She sits regularly as arbitrator in commercial arbitration cases\, and is listed on the international arbitrator panels of the SIAC\, HKIAC\, CIETAC\, ICDR/AAA\, AIAC\, KCAB\, CEAC etc. Jessica is a court member of SIAC Court of Arbitration\, a member of the International/ Asia Advisory Committee of the AAA/ICDR\, a member of the CEAC Advisory Board\, VP of the UIA Litigation Committee and China Chapter Chair of NYSBA International Section. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Sae Youn Kim		\n				\n				\n				\n							Sae Youn Kim is a partner of the International Arbitration & Cross-Border Litigation Practice of Kim & Chang. Ms. Kim practices primarily in the areas of international litigation and arbitration with an emphasis on commercial and international law. Before joining Kim & Chang\, she served as a judge at various Korean district courts\, and practiced as a key member in major Korean law firms. Ms. Kim also sits as an arbitrator. Her expertise in international dispute resolution has been recognized by the variety of roles she holds and held in various institutions\, including but not limited to a Commissioner of the Korea Trade Commission\, a Vice-Chair of the Arbitration Committee of the International Bar Association\, a Co-Chair of the Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Committee of the Inter-Pacific Bar Association\, and a member of the ICC Court. She is regularly selected as leading lawyer by publications such as Chambers and Partners\, Who’s Who Legal\, Legal 500\, and Asian Legal Business. Ms. Kim received an LL.M. from Duke University Law School in 2007\, and her LL.B. from Seoul National University College of Law in 1991. She graduated the Judicial Training and Research Institute by the Supreme Court of Korea in 1994. She speaks and practices in both Korean and English. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Vijayendra Pratap Singh		\n				\n				\n				\n							With over 20 years of experience\, Vijayendra Pratap Singh heads the Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice in Delhi. Vijayendra represents clients in international\, commercial and domestic arbitrations; corporate and commercial litigation; regulatory practices and securities law. He has advised various government departments\, such as the Department of Economic Affairs\, Ministry of Finance; Securities and Exchange Board of India; Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation; the Ministry of Consumer Affairs\, etc.\, on the de-criminalisation of various Statutes and has been involved in various policy making initiatives of the Government of India. Vijayendra’s expertise span domestic and international arbitration\, as well as disputes in various fora in India\, ranging from shareholder disputes to corporate actions. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Lawrence Teh (Moderator)		\n				\n				\n				\n							Lawrence Teh is the Global Co-Head of Dentons’ International Arbitration practice and a senior partner in Dentons Rodyk’s Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice group. He is Co-Head of Dentons Rodyk’s International Arbitration and Shipping practice groups. He has particular experience in handling commercial disputes including those of international trade and commodities\, maritime and aviation\, banking and financial services\, onshore and offshore construction\, mergers\, acquisitions\, joint ventures and other investments\, and insurance. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Attendance Policy		\n				\n				\n				\n							Participants who wish to obtain CPD Points are reminded that they must comply strictly with the Attendance Policy set out in the CPD Guidelines. For participants attending the face-to-face activity\, this includes signing in on arrival and signing out at the conclusion of the activity in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being absent from the activity for more than 15 minutes. For those participating via the webinar\, this includes logging in at the start of the webinar and logging out at the conclusion of the webinar in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being away from the activity for more than 15 minutes. Participants who do not comply with the Attendance Policy will not be able to obtain CPD Points for attending the activity. Please refer to https://www.silecpdcentre.sg for more information. Practice Area: Alternative Dispute Resolution Training Category: General 						\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Earn 1 Public CPD Point		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Terms & Conditions		\n				\n				\n				\n							1) Registration – Limited slots are available on a first-come-first-served basis. 2) Consent to data collection – You consent for Maxwell Chambers and their partners to collect\, use and disclose the personal data that you provide in this form for marketing purposes\, including adding you to their mailing list for industry updates. The Organiser reserves the right to cancel or alter the content and timing of the programme or the identity of the speakers. In the event that the webinar is cancelled by the Organiser\, the participants will be notified prior to the webinar. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Share		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n								\n						\n															\n																Share on facebook\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on twitter\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on linkedin\n							\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on whatsapp\n							\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/2025/10/07/5questionswithmaxwell-green-edition-christine-falcicchio/#new_tab
LOCATION:Singapore
CATEGORIES:Happenings by Maxwell Chambers
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/5Questions-8-Christine-Falcicchio-Banner-scaled.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20251015
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20251016
DTSTAMP:20260620T115841
CREATED:20251015T084027Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20251015T084106Z
UID:10000714-1760486400-1760572799@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:[Ep 16] Maxwell Unplugged: Mariel Dimsey and Vanina Sucharitkul
DESCRIPTION:Event Details		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Maxwell Conversations: Managing Public Policy | 29 August 2024		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n				\n				\n							Maxwell Conversations features leading personalities at the top of the international dispute resolution industry. These events seek to challenge assumptions with a deeper examination of the issues. Synposis  Public policy is an important element in determining the arbitrability of a dispute\, and also a ground on which an award may be annulled or refused enforcement. It has often been said that the public policy should be construed narrowly in keeping with the pro-arbitration policy of the New York Convention or the UNCITRAL Model Law. Held as part of Singapore Convention Week\, this session of Maxwell Conversations focused on the crucial role of public policy in international arbitration. The discussion highlighted how public policy influences the arbitrability of disputes and serves as grounds for annulling or refusing the enforcement of an award. While it is commonly understood that public policy should be interpreted narrowly\, aligning with the pro-arbitration stance of the New York Convention and UNCITRAL Model Law\, the event also shed light on less frequently discussed topics. The panel explored the importance of arbitrator independence and seat court review\, which are considered part of the “international public policy” of arbitration. This was contrasted with how courts may enforce annulled awards if they deem the annulment contrary to their own national public policy\, touching on issues like crime\, corruption\, or sovereignty. The discussion raised important questions about whether international and national public policies are opposing forces or if enforcing courts should consider multiple layers of public policy\, including the public policies of the governing law\, the seat of arbitration\, and how to navigate conflicts between these different frameworks. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n				\n				\n							The books referenced by Michael at the start of the session are: \n\nThe Public Policy Exception under the New York Convention\, Second Edition by Anton G. Maurer\nICCA’s Guide to the Interpretation of the 1958 New York Convention\, Second Edition\nGuide on the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards\, New York 1958 by the UNCITRAL Secretariat\n\nAdditional reference materials include: \n\nRe-calibration of curial intervention in public policy challenges against arbitral awards” written by Darius Chan and Elias Ngai of the Singapore Management University in the Journal of International Arbitration\n						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Q&A from the Lecture:		\n				\n				\n				\n							Q1: What are the potential challenges in the future for issuing arbitral awards? Are there any changes in environment or technology that may mitigate or worsen these challenges? \nQ2: What aspects of arbitration are ready for AI? \nQ3: What do you think are the key issues that need to be considered when using technology? \nQ4: About diversity\, I notice that the ICC now has an almost 50/50 male/female mix. Is this too fast and too artificial? \nQ5: For operating with ICC arbitration\, since the publishing of the ICC arbitration rules 2021 in the year of 2021\, which part of the arbitration rules 2021 would ICC suggest multi-national companies\, future expert witnesses\, future party representatives and future arbitrators to pay attention to as per ICC’s observation so far? \nQ6: What would ICC like expert witnesses\, party representatives\, and arbitrators to do (and prepare themselves) in order to operate ICC arbitration in line with ICC’s vision?  						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Watch the full recorded session below:		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										29 August 2024\, Thursday \n									\n								\n											\n													\n										8.00 am – 9:30 am (GMT+8)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										Singapore\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Organiser: Maxwell Chambers\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Format: Hybrid (In-person at Maxwell Chambers\, Online over Zoom)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																\n															\n															\n				\n				\n				\n					\n			\n							\n								\n							\n						\n				\n					CategoryFee (SGD)				\n			\n					\n					\n				\n			YouTube Livestreaming TicketFreeZoom Webinar Ticket$30*		\n					\n		\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Speakers		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Dr Michael Hwang		\n				\n				\n				\n							Dr Michael Hwang S.C. currently practises as an international arbitrator based in Singapore with a selective practice as Senior Counsel of the Supreme Court of Singapore. He served as the Chief Justice of the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) Courts from 2010 – 2018.   Dr Hwang’s other past appointments include: Judicial Commissioner of the Supreme Court of Singapore; Singapore’s Non-Resident Ambassador to Switzerland and Argentina; President of the Law Society of Singapore; Commissioner of the United Nations Compensation Commission; Vice Chairman of the ICC International Court of Arbitration; Vice President of the International Council of Commercial Arbitration (ICCA); and a Visiting (and later Adjunct) Professor of the National University of Singapore. He was educated at undergraduate and postgraduate levels at Oxford University\, where he won the Gordon Warter Scholarship from Pembroke College by open competitive examination. He has been conferred an Honorary LLD by the University of Sydney. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Jessica Fei		\n				\n				\n				\n							Jessica is a widely recognized leading international arbitration and dispute resolution specialist with close to 30 years’ experience working with international arbitration institutions and leading firms.  Constantly ranked and recommended by leading legal media including Chambers\, WWL\, Legal 500\, and ALB\, Jessica is one of the very few leading international arbitration practitioners (acting as counsel and arbitrator)  with dual qualifications (China and New York) as well as extensive cross-border dispute resolution experience between Chinese/Asian and Western parties. Jessica focuses her practice on international arbitration\, litigation and alternative disputes resolution. She sits regularly as arbitrator in commercial arbitration cases\, and is listed on the international arbitrator panels of the SIAC\, HKIAC\, CIETAC\, ICDR/AAA\, AIAC\, KCAB\, CEAC etc. Jessica is a court member of SIAC Court of Arbitration\, a member of the International/ Asia Advisory Committee of the AAA/ICDR\, a member of the CEAC Advisory Board\, VP of the UIA Litigation Committee and China Chapter Chair of NYSBA International Section. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Sae Youn Kim		\n				\n				\n				\n							Sae Youn Kim is a partner of the International Arbitration & Cross-Border Litigation Practice of Kim & Chang. Ms. Kim practices primarily in the areas of international litigation and arbitration with an emphasis on commercial and international law. Before joining Kim & Chang\, she served as a judge at various Korean district courts\, and practiced as a key member in major Korean law firms. Ms. Kim also sits as an arbitrator. Her expertise in international dispute resolution has been recognized by the variety of roles she holds and held in various institutions\, including but not limited to a Commissioner of the Korea Trade Commission\, a Vice-Chair of the Arbitration Committee of the International Bar Association\, a Co-Chair of the Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Committee of the Inter-Pacific Bar Association\, and a member of the ICC Court. She is regularly selected as leading lawyer by publications such as Chambers and Partners\, Who’s Who Legal\, Legal 500\, and Asian Legal Business. Ms. Kim received an LL.M. from Duke University Law School in 2007\, and her LL.B. from Seoul National University College of Law in 1991. She graduated the Judicial Training and Research Institute by the Supreme Court of Korea in 1994. She speaks and practices in both Korean and English. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Vijayendra Pratap Singh		\n				\n				\n				\n							With over 20 years of experience\, Vijayendra Pratap Singh heads the Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice in Delhi. Vijayendra represents clients in international\, commercial and domestic arbitrations; corporate and commercial litigation; regulatory practices and securities law. He has advised various government departments\, such as the Department of Economic Affairs\, Ministry of Finance; Securities and Exchange Board of India; Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation; the Ministry of Consumer Affairs\, etc.\, on the de-criminalisation of various Statutes and has been involved in various policy making initiatives of the Government of India. Vijayendra’s expertise span domestic and international arbitration\, as well as disputes in various fora in India\, ranging from shareholder disputes to corporate actions. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Lawrence Teh (Moderator)		\n				\n				\n				\n							Lawrence Teh is the Global Co-Head of Dentons’ International Arbitration practice and a senior partner in Dentons Rodyk’s Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice group. He is Co-Head of Dentons Rodyk’s International Arbitration and Shipping practice groups. He has particular experience in handling commercial disputes including those of international trade and commodities\, maritime and aviation\, banking and financial services\, onshore and offshore construction\, mergers\, acquisitions\, joint ventures and other investments\, and insurance. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Attendance Policy		\n				\n				\n				\n							Participants who wish to obtain CPD Points are reminded that they must comply strictly with the Attendance Policy set out in the CPD Guidelines. For participants attending the face-to-face activity\, this includes signing in on arrival and signing out at the conclusion of the activity in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being absent from the activity for more than 15 minutes. For those participating via the webinar\, this includes logging in at the start of the webinar and logging out at the conclusion of the webinar in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being away from the activity for more than 15 minutes. Participants who do not comply with the Attendance Policy will not be able to obtain CPD Points for attending the activity. Please refer to https://www.silecpdcentre.sg for more information. Practice Area: Alternative Dispute Resolution Training Category: General 						\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Earn 1 Public CPD Point		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Terms & Conditions		\n				\n				\n				\n							1) Registration – Limited slots are available on a first-come-first-served basis. 2) Consent to data collection – You consent for Maxwell Chambers and their partners to collect\, use and disclose the personal data that you provide in this form for marketing purposes\, including adding you to their mailing list for industry updates. The Organiser reserves the right to cancel or alter the content and timing of the programme or the identity of the speakers. In the event that the webinar is cancelled by the Organiser\, the participants will be notified prior to the webinar. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Share		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n								\n						\n															\n																Share on facebook\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on twitter\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on linkedin\n							\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on whatsapp\n							\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/maxwell-unplugged/#new_tab
LOCATION:Singapore
CATEGORIES:Happenings by Maxwell Chambers
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Maxwell-Chambers-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Singapore:20251106T123000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Singapore:20251106T133000
DTSTAMP:20260620T115841
CREATED:20251022T085500Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20251103T033503Z
UID:10000716-1762432200-1762435800@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:Makan with Maxwell: Photography Workshop - Through the Lens:  Capture Moments\, Craft Stories
DESCRIPTION:Event Details		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Maxwell Conversations: Managing Public Policy | 29 August 2024		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n				\n				\n							Maxwell Conversations features leading personalities at the top of the international dispute resolution industry. These events seek to challenge assumptions with a deeper examination of the issues. Synposis  Public policy is an important element in determining the arbitrability of a dispute\, and also a ground on which an award may be annulled or refused enforcement. It has often been said that the public policy should be construed narrowly in keeping with the pro-arbitration policy of the New York Convention or the UNCITRAL Model Law. Held as part of Singapore Convention Week\, this session of Maxwell Conversations focused on the crucial role of public policy in international arbitration. The discussion highlighted how public policy influences the arbitrability of disputes and serves as grounds for annulling or refusing the enforcement of an award. While it is commonly understood that public policy should be interpreted narrowly\, aligning with the pro-arbitration stance of the New York Convention and UNCITRAL Model Law\, the event also shed light on less frequently discussed topics. The panel explored the importance of arbitrator independence and seat court review\, which are considered part of the “international public policy” of arbitration. This was contrasted with how courts may enforce annulled awards if they deem the annulment contrary to their own national public policy\, touching on issues like crime\, corruption\, or sovereignty. The discussion raised important questions about whether international and national public policies are opposing forces or if enforcing courts should consider multiple layers of public policy\, including the public policies of the governing law\, the seat of arbitration\, and how to navigate conflicts between these different frameworks. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n				\n				\n							The books referenced by Michael at the start of the session are: \n\nThe Public Policy Exception under the New York Convention\, Second Edition by Anton G. Maurer\nICCA’s Guide to the Interpretation of the 1958 New York Convention\, Second Edition\nGuide on the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards\, New York 1958 by the UNCITRAL Secretariat\n\nAdditional reference materials include: \n\nRe-calibration of curial intervention in public policy challenges against arbitral awards” written by Darius Chan and Elias Ngai of the Singapore Management University in the Journal of International Arbitration\n						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Q&A from the Lecture:		\n				\n				\n				\n							Q1: What are the potential challenges in the future for issuing arbitral awards? Are there any changes in environment or technology that may mitigate or worsen these challenges? \nQ2: What aspects of arbitration are ready for AI? \nQ3: What do you think are the key issues that need to be considered when using technology? \nQ4: About diversity\, I notice that the ICC now has an almost 50/50 male/female mix. Is this too fast and too artificial? \nQ5: For operating with ICC arbitration\, since the publishing of the ICC arbitration rules 2021 in the year of 2021\, which part of the arbitration rules 2021 would ICC suggest multi-national companies\, future expert witnesses\, future party representatives and future arbitrators to pay attention to as per ICC’s observation so far? \nQ6: What would ICC like expert witnesses\, party representatives\, and arbitrators to do (and prepare themselves) in order to operate ICC arbitration in line with ICC’s vision?  						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Watch the full recorded session below:		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										29 August 2024\, Thursday \n									\n								\n											\n													\n										8.00 am – 9:30 am (GMT+8)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										Singapore\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Organiser: Maxwell Chambers\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Format: Hybrid (In-person at Maxwell Chambers\, Online over Zoom)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																\n															\n															\n				\n				\n				\n					\n			\n							\n								\n							\n						\n				\n					CategoryFee (SGD)				\n			\n					\n					\n				\n			YouTube Livestreaming TicketFreeZoom Webinar Ticket$30*		\n					\n		\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Speakers		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Dr Michael Hwang		\n				\n				\n				\n							Dr Michael Hwang S.C. currently practises as an international arbitrator based in Singapore with a selective practice as Senior Counsel of the Supreme Court of Singapore. He served as the Chief Justice of the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) Courts from 2010 – 2018.   Dr Hwang’s other past appointments include: Judicial Commissioner of the Supreme Court of Singapore; Singapore’s Non-Resident Ambassador to Switzerland and Argentina; President of the Law Society of Singapore; Commissioner of the United Nations Compensation Commission; Vice Chairman of the ICC International Court of Arbitration; Vice President of the International Council of Commercial Arbitration (ICCA); and a Visiting (and later Adjunct) Professor of the National University of Singapore. He was educated at undergraduate and postgraduate levels at Oxford University\, where he won the Gordon Warter Scholarship from Pembroke College by open competitive examination. He has been conferred an Honorary LLD by the University of Sydney. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Jessica Fei		\n				\n				\n				\n							Jessica is a widely recognized leading international arbitration and dispute resolution specialist with close to 30 years’ experience working with international arbitration institutions and leading firms.  Constantly ranked and recommended by leading legal media including Chambers\, WWL\, Legal 500\, and ALB\, Jessica is one of the very few leading international arbitration practitioners (acting as counsel and arbitrator)  with dual qualifications (China and New York) as well as extensive cross-border dispute resolution experience between Chinese/Asian and Western parties. Jessica focuses her practice on international arbitration\, litigation and alternative disputes resolution. She sits regularly as arbitrator in commercial arbitration cases\, and is listed on the international arbitrator panels of the SIAC\, HKIAC\, CIETAC\, ICDR/AAA\, AIAC\, KCAB\, CEAC etc. Jessica is a court member of SIAC Court of Arbitration\, a member of the International/ Asia Advisory Committee of the AAA/ICDR\, a member of the CEAC Advisory Board\, VP of the UIA Litigation Committee and China Chapter Chair of NYSBA International Section. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Sae Youn Kim		\n				\n				\n				\n							Sae Youn Kim is a partner of the International Arbitration & Cross-Border Litigation Practice of Kim & Chang. Ms. Kim practices primarily in the areas of international litigation and arbitration with an emphasis on commercial and international law. Before joining Kim & Chang\, she served as a judge at various Korean district courts\, and practiced as a key member in major Korean law firms. Ms. Kim also sits as an arbitrator. Her expertise in international dispute resolution has been recognized by the variety of roles she holds and held in various institutions\, including but not limited to a Commissioner of the Korea Trade Commission\, a Vice-Chair of the Arbitration Committee of the International Bar Association\, a Co-Chair of the Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Committee of the Inter-Pacific Bar Association\, and a member of the ICC Court. She is regularly selected as leading lawyer by publications such as Chambers and Partners\, Who’s Who Legal\, Legal 500\, and Asian Legal Business. Ms. Kim received an LL.M. from Duke University Law School in 2007\, and her LL.B. from Seoul National University College of Law in 1991. She graduated the Judicial Training and Research Institute by the Supreme Court of Korea in 1994. She speaks and practices in both Korean and English. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Vijayendra Pratap Singh		\n				\n				\n				\n							With over 20 years of experience\, Vijayendra Pratap Singh heads the Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice in Delhi. Vijayendra represents clients in international\, commercial and domestic arbitrations; corporate and commercial litigation; regulatory practices and securities law. He has advised various government departments\, such as the Department of Economic Affairs\, Ministry of Finance; Securities and Exchange Board of India; Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation; the Ministry of Consumer Affairs\, etc.\, on the de-criminalisation of various Statutes and has been involved in various policy making initiatives of the Government of India. Vijayendra’s expertise span domestic and international arbitration\, as well as disputes in various fora in India\, ranging from shareholder disputes to corporate actions. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Lawrence Teh (Moderator)		\n				\n				\n				\n							Lawrence Teh is the Global Co-Head of Dentons’ International Arbitration practice and a senior partner in Dentons Rodyk’s Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice group. He is Co-Head of Dentons Rodyk’s International Arbitration and Shipping practice groups. He has particular experience in handling commercial disputes including those of international trade and commodities\, maritime and aviation\, banking and financial services\, onshore and offshore construction\, mergers\, acquisitions\, joint ventures and other investments\, and insurance. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Attendance Policy		\n				\n				\n				\n							Participants who wish to obtain CPD Points are reminded that they must comply strictly with the Attendance Policy set out in the CPD Guidelines. For participants attending the face-to-face activity\, this includes signing in on arrival and signing out at the conclusion of the activity in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being absent from the activity for more than 15 minutes. For those participating via the webinar\, this includes logging in at the start of the webinar and logging out at the conclusion of the webinar in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being away from the activity for more than 15 minutes. Participants who do not comply with the Attendance Policy will not be able to obtain CPD Points for attending the activity. Please refer to https://www.silecpdcentre.sg for more information. Practice Area: Alternative Dispute Resolution Training Category: General 						\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Earn 1 Public CPD Point		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Terms & Conditions		\n				\n				\n				\n							1) Registration – Limited slots are available on a first-come-first-served basis. 2) Consent to data collection – You consent for Maxwell Chambers and their partners to collect\, use and disclose the personal data that you provide in this form for marketing purposes\, including adding you to their mailing list for industry updates. The Organiser reserves the right to cancel or alter the content and timing of the programme or the identity of the speakers. In the event that the webinar is cancelled by the Organiser\, the participants will be notified prior to the webinar. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Share		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n								\n						\n															\n																Share on facebook\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on twitter\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on linkedin\n							\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on whatsapp\n							\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/event/makan-with-maxwell-photography-workshop-through-the-lens-capture-moments-craft-stories/
LOCATION:Singapore
CATEGORIES:Happenings by Maxwell Chambers
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/our-logo-image-10.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20251117
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20251118
DTSTAMP:20260620T115842
CREATED:20251117T024753Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20251117T024753Z
UID:10000742-1763337600-1763423999@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:[Ep 17] Maxwell Unplugged: Gloria Lim and Hazel Tang
DESCRIPTION:Event Details		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Maxwell Conversations: Managing Public Policy | 29 August 2024		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n				\n				\n							Maxwell Conversations features leading personalities at the top of the international dispute resolution industry. These events seek to challenge assumptions with a deeper examination of the issues. Synposis  Public policy is an important element in determining the arbitrability of a dispute\, and also a ground on which an award may be annulled or refused enforcement. It has often been said that the public policy should be construed narrowly in keeping with the pro-arbitration policy of the New York Convention or the UNCITRAL Model Law. Held as part of Singapore Convention Week\, this session of Maxwell Conversations focused on the crucial role of public policy in international arbitration. The discussion highlighted how public policy influences the arbitrability of disputes and serves as grounds for annulling or refusing the enforcement of an award. While it is commonly understood that public policy should be interpreted narrowly\, aligning with the pro-arbitration stance of the New York Convention and UNCITRAL Model Law\, the event also shed light on less frequently discussed topics. The panel explored the importance of arbitrator independence and seat court review\, which are considered part of the “international public policy” of arbitration. This was contrasted with how courts may enforce annulled awards if they deem the annulment contrary to their own national public policy\, touching on issues like crime\, corruption\, or sovereignty. The discussion raised important questions about whether international and national public policies are opposing forces or if enforcing courts should consider multiple layers of public policy\, including the public policies of the governing law\, the seat of arbitration\, and how to navigate conflicts between these different frameworks. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n				\n				\n							The books referenced by Michael at the start of the session are: \n\nThe Public Policy Exception under the New York Convention\, Second Edition by Anton G. Maurer\nICCA’s Guide to the Interpretation of the 1958 New York Convention\, Second Edition\nGuide on the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards\, New York 1958 by the UNCITRAL Secretariat\n\nAdditional reference materials include: \n\nRe-calibration of curial intervention in public policy challenges against arbitral awards” written by Darius Chan and Elias Ngai of the Singapore Management University in the Journal of International Arbitration\n						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Q&A from the Lecture:		\n				\n				\n				\n							Q1: What are the potential challenges in the future for issuing arbitral awards? Are there any changes in environment or technology that may mitigate or worsen these challenges? \nQ2: What aspects of arbitration are ready for AI? \nQ3: What do you think are the key issues that need to be considered when using technology? \nQ4: About diversity\, I notice that the ICC now has an almost 50/50 male/female mix. Is this too fast and too artificial? \nQ5: For operating with ICC arbitration\, since the publishing of the ICC arbitration rules 2021 in the year of 2021\, which part of the arbitration rules 2021 would ICC suggest multi-national companies\, future expert witnesses\, future party representatives and future arbitrators to pay attention to as per ICC’s observation so far? \nQ6: What would ICC like expert witnesses\, party representatives\, and arbitrators to do (and prepare themselves) in order to operate ICC arbitration in line with ICC’s vision?  						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Watch the full recorded session below:		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										29 August 2024\, Thursday \n									\n								\n											\n													\n										8.00 am – 9:30 am (GMT+8)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										Singapore\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Organiser: Maxwell Chambers\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Format: Hybrid (In-person at Maxwell Chambers\, Online over Zoom)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																\n															\n															\n				\n				\n				\n					\n			\n							\n								\n							\n						\n				\n					CategoryFee (SGD)				\n			\n					\n					\n				\n			YouTube Livestreaming TicketFreeZoom Webinar Ticket$30*		\n					\n		\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Speakers		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Dr Michael Hwang		\n				\n				\n				\n							Dr Michael Hwang S.C. currently practises as an international arbitrator based in Singapore with a selective practice as Senior Counsel of the Supreme Court of Singapore. He served as the Chief Justice of the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) Courts from 2010 – 2018.   Dr Hwang’s other past appointments include: Judicial Commissioner of the Supreme Court of Singapore; Singapore’s Non-Resident Ambassador to Switzerland and Argentina; President of the Law Society of Singapore; Commissioner of the United Nations Compensation Commission; Vice Chairman of the ICC International Court of Arbitration; Vice President of the International Council of Commercial Arbitration (ICCA); and a Visiting (and later Adjunct) Professor of the National University of Singapore. He was educated at undergraduate and postgraduate levels at Oxford University\, where he won the Gordon Warter Scholarship from Pembroke College by open competitive examination. He has been conferred an Honorary LLD by the University of Sydney. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Jessica Fei		\n				\n				\n				\n							Jessica is a widely recognized leading international arbitration and dispute resolution specialist with close to 30 years’ experience working with international arbitration institutions and leading firms.  Constantly ranked and recommended by leading legal media including Chambers\, WWL\, Legal 500\, and ALB\, Jessica is one of the very few leading international arbitration practitioners (acting as counsel and arbitrator)  with dual qualifications (China and New York) as well as extensive cross-border dispute resolution experience between Chinese/Asian and Western parties. Jessica focuses her practice on international arbitration\, litigation and alternative disputes resolution. She sits regularly as arbitrator in commercial arbitration cases\, and is listed on the international arbitrator panels of the SIAC\, HKIAC\, CIETAC\, ICDR/AAA\, AIAC\, KCAB\, CEAC etc. Jessica is a court member of SIAC Court of Arbitration\, a member of the International/ Asia Advisory Committee of the AAA/ICDR\, a member of the CEAC Advisory Board\, VP of the UIA Litigation Committee and China Chapter Chair of NYSBA International Section. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Sae Youn Kim		\n				\n				\n				\n							Sae Youn Kim is a partner of the International Arbitration & Cross-Border Litigation Practice of Kim & Chang. Ms. Kim practices primarily in the areas of international litigation and arbitration with an emphasis on commercial and international law. Before joining Kim & Chang\, she served as a judge at various Korean district courts\, and practiced as a key member in major Korean law firms. Ms. Kim also sits as an arbitrator. Her expertise in international dispute resolution has been recognized by the variety of roles she holds and held in various institutions\, including but not limited to a Commissioner of the Korea Trade Commission\, a Vice-Chair of the Arbitration Committee of the International Bar Association\, a Co-Chair of the Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Committee of the Inter-Pacific Bar Association\, and a member of the ICC Court. She is regularly selected as leading lawyer by publications such as Chambers and Partners\, Who’s Who Legal\, Legal 500\, and Asian Legal Business. Ms. Kim received an LL.M. from Duke University Law School in 2007\, and her LL.B. from Seoul National University College of Law in 1991. She graduated the Judicial Training and Research Institute by the Supreme Court of Korea in 1994. She speaks and practices in both Korean and English. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Vijayendra Pratap Singh		\n				\n				\n				\n							With over 20 years of experience\, Vijayendra Pratap Singh heads the Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice in Delhi. Vijayendra represents clients in international\, commercial and domestic arbitrations; corporate and commercial litigation; regulatory practices and securities law. He has advised various government departments\, such as the Department of Economic Affairs\, Ministry of Finance; Securities and Exchange Board of India; Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation; the Ministry of Consumer Affairs\, etc.\, on the de-criminalisation of various Statutes and has been involved in various policy making initiatives of the Government of India. Vijayendra’s expertise span domestic and international arbitration\, as well as disputes in various fora in India\, ranging from shareholder disputes to corporate actions. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Lawrence Teh (Moderator)		\n				\n				\n				\n							Lawrence Teh is the Global Co-Head of Dentons’ International Arbitration practice and a senior partner in Dentons Rodyk’s Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice group. He is Co-Head of Dentons Rodyk’s International Arbitration and Shipping practice groups. He has particular experience in handling commercial disputes including those of international trade and commodities\, maritime and aviation\, banking and financial services\, onshore and offshore construction\, mergers\, acquisitions\, joint ventures and other investments\, and insurance. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Attendance Policy		\n				\n				\n				\n							Participants who wish to obtain CPD Points are reminded that they must comply strictly with the Attendance Policy set out in the CPD Guidelines. For participants attending the face-to-face activity\, this includes signing in on arrival and signing out at the conclusion of the activity in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being absent from the activity for more than 15 minutes. For those participating via the webinar\, this includes logging in at the start of the webinar and logging out at the conclusion of the webinar in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being away from the activity for more than 15 minutes. Participants who do not comply with the Attendance Policy will not be able to obtain CPD Points for attending the activity. Please refer to https://www.silecpdcentre.sg for more information. Practice Area: Alternative Dispute Resolution Training Category: General 						\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Earn 1 Public CPD Point		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Terms & Conditions		\n				\n				\n				\n							1) Registration – Limited slots are available on a first-come-first-served basis. 2) Consent to data collection – You consent for Maxwell Chambers and their partners to collect\, use and disclose the personal data that you provide in this form for marketing purposes\, including adding you to their mailing list for industry updates. The Organiser reserves the right to cancel or alter the content and timing of the programme or the identity of the speakers. In the event that the webinar is cancelled by the Organiser\, the participants will be notified prior to the webinar. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Share		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n								\n						\n															\n																Share on facebook\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on twitter\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on linkedin\n							\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on whatsapp\n							\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/maxwell-unplugged/#new_tab
LOCATION:Singapore
CATEGORIES:Happenings by Maxwell Chambers
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Maxwell-Chambers-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Singapore:20251120T184500
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Singapore:20251120T203000
DTSTAMP:20260620T115842
CREATED:20251013T021831Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20251013T022013Z
UID:10000712-1763664300-1763670600@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:Life After SC Week – Cocktail Evening
DESCRIPTION:Event Details		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Maxwell Conversations: Managing Public Policy | 29 August 2024		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n				\n				\n							Maxwell Conversations features leading personalities at the top of the international dispute resolution industry. These events seek to challenge assumptions with a deeper examination of the issues. Synposis  Public policy is an important element in determining the arbitrability of a dispute\, and also a ground on which an award may be annulled or refused enforcement. It has often been said that the public policy should be construed narrowly in keeping with the pro-arbitration policy of the New York Convention or the UNCITRAL Model Law. Held as part of Singapore Convention Week\, this session of Maxwell Conversations focused on the crucial role of public policy in international arbitration. The discussion highlighted how public policy influences the arbitrability of disputes and serves as grounds for annulling or refusing the enforcement of an award. While it is commonly understood that public policy should be interpreted narrowly\, aligning with the pro-arbitration stance of the New York Convention and UNCITRAL Model Law\, the event also shed light on less frequently discussed topics. The panel explored the importance of arbitrator independence and seat court review\, which are considered part of the “international public policy” of arbitration. This was contrasted with how courts may enforce annulled awards if they deem the annulment contrary to their own national public policy\, touching on issues like crime\, corruption\, or sovereignty. The discussion raised important questions about whether international and national public policies are opposing forces or if enforcing courts should consider multiple layers of public policy\, including the public policies of the governing law\, the seat of arbitration\, and how to navigate conflicts between these different frameworks. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n				\n				\n							The books referenced by Michael at the start of the session are: \n\nThe Public Policy Exception under the New York Convention\, Second Edition by Anton G. Maurer\nICCA’s Guide to the Interpretation of the 1958 New York Convention\, Second Edition\nGuide on the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards\, New York 1958 by the UNCITRAL Secretariat\n\nAdditional reference materials include: \n\nRe-calibration of curial intervention in public policy challenges against arbitral awards” written by Darius Chan and Elias Ngai of the Singapore Management University in the Journal of International Arbitration\n						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Q&A from the Lecture:		\n				\n				\n				\n							Q1: What are the potential challenges in the future for issuing arbitral awards? Are there any changes in environment or technology that may mitigate or worsen these challenges? \nQ2: What aspects of arbitration are ready for AI? \nQ3: What do you think are the key issues that need to be considered when using technology? \nQ4: About diversity\, I notice that the ICC now has an almost 50/50 male/female mix. Is this too fast and too artificial? \nQ5: For operating with ICC arbitration\, since the publishing of the ICC arbitration rules 2021 in the year of 2021\, which part of the arbitration rules 2021 would ICC suggest multi-national companies\, future expert witnesses\, future party representatives and future arbitrators to pay attention to as per ICC’s observation so far? \nQ6: What would ICC like expert witnesses\, party representatives\, and arbitrators to do (and prepare themselves) in order to operate ICC arbitration in line with ICC’s vision?  						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Watch the full recorded session below:		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										29 August 2024\, Thursday \n									\n								\n											\n													\n										8.00 am – 9:30 am (GMT+8)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										Singapore\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Organiser: Maxwell Chambers\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Format: Hybrid (In-person at Maxwell Chambers\, Online over Zoom)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																\n															\n															\n				\n				\n				\n					\n			\n							\n								\n							\n						\n				\n					CategoryFee (SGD)				\n			\n					\n					\n				\n			YouTube Livestreaming TicketFreeZoom Webinar Ticket$30*		\n					\n		\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Speakers		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Dr Michael Hwang		\n				\n				\n				\n							Dr Michael Hwang S.C. currently practises as an international arbitrator based in Singapore with a selective practice as Senior Counsel of the Supreme Court of Singapore. He served as the Chief Justice of the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) Courts from 2010 – 2018.   Dr Hwang’s other past appointments include: Judicial Commissioner of the Supreme Court of Singapore; Singapore’s Non-Resident Ambassador to Switzerland and Argentina; President of the Law Society of Singapore; Commissioner of the United Nations Compensation Commission; Vice Chairman of the ICC International Court of Arbitration; Vice President of the International Council of Commercial Arbitration (ICCA); and a Visiting (and later Adjunct) Professor of the National University of Singapore. He was educated at undergraduate and postgraduate levels at Oxford University\, where he won the Gordon Warter Scholarship from Pembroke College by open competitive examination. He has been conferred an Honorary LLD by the University of Sydney. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Jessica Fei		\n				\n				\n				\n							Jessica is a widely recognized leading international arbitration and dispute resolution specialist with close to 30 years’ experience working with international arbitration institutions and leading firms.  Constantly ranked and recommended by leading legal media including Chambers\, WWL\, Legal 500\, and ALB\, Jessica is one of the very few leading international arbitration practitioners (acting as counsel and arbitrator)  with dual qualifications (China and New York) as well as extensive cross-border dispute resolution experience between Chinese/Asian and Western parties. Jessica focuses her practice on international arbitration\, litigation and alternative disputes resolution. She sits regularly as arbitrator in commercial arbitration cases\, and is listed on the international arbitrator panels of the SIAC\, HKIAC\, CIETAC\, ICDR/AAA\, AIAC\, KCAB\, CEAC etc. Jessica is a court member of SIAC Court of Arbitration\, a member of the International/ Asia Advisory Committee of the AAA/ICDR\, a member of the CEAC Advisory Board\, VP of the UIA Litigation Committee and China Chapter Chair of NYSBA International Section. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Sae Youn Kim		\n				\n				\n				\n							Sae Youn Kim is a partner of the International Arbitration & Cross-Border Litigation Practice of Kim & Chang. Ms. Kim practices primarily in the areas of international litigation and arbitration with an emphasis on commercial and international law. Before joining Kim & Chang\, she served as a judge at various Korean district courts\, and practiced as a key member in major Korean law firms. Ms. Kim also sits as an arbitrator. Her expertise in international dispute resolution has been recognized by the variety of roles she holds and held in various institutions\, including but not limited to a Commissioner of the Korea Trade Commission\, a Vice-Chair of the Arbitration Committee of the International Bar Association\, a Co-Chair of the Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Committee of the Inter-Pacific Bar Association\, and a member of the ICC Court. She is regularly selected as leading lawyer by publications such as Chambers and Partners\, Who’s Who Legal\, Legal 500\, and Asian Legal Business. Ms. Kim received an LL.M. from Duke University Law School in 2007\, and her LL.B. from Seoul National University College of Law in 1991. She graduated the Judicial Training and Research Institute by the Supreme Court of Korea in 1994. She speaks and practices in both Korean and English. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Vijayendra Pratap Singh		\n				\n				\n				\n							With over 20 years of experience\, Vijayendra Pratap Singh heads the Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice in Delhi. Vijayendra represents clients in international\, commercial and domestic arbitrations; corporate and commercial litigation; regulatory practices and securities law. He has advised various government departments\, such as the Department of Economic Affairs\, Ministry of Finance; Securities and Exchange Board of India; Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation; the Ministry of Consumer Affairs\, etc.\, on the de-criminalisation of various Statutes and has been involved in various policy making initiatives of the Government of India. Vijayendra’s expertise span domestic and international arbitration\, as well as disputes in various fora in India\, ranging from shareholder disputes to corporate actions. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Lawrence Teh (Moderator)		\n				\n				\n				\n							Lawrence Teh is the Global Co-Head of Dentons’ International Arbitration practice and a senior partner in Dentons Rodyk’s Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice group. He is Co-Head of Dentons Rodyk’s International Arbitration and Shipping practice groups. He has particular experience in handling commercial disputes including those of international trade and commodities\, maritime and aviation\, banking and financial services\, onshore and offshore construction\, mergers\, acquisitions\, joint ventures and other investments\, and insurance. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Attendance Policy		\n				\n				\n				\n							Participants who wish to obtain CPD Points are reminded that they must comply strictly with the Attendance Policy set out in the CPD Guidelines. For participants attending the face-to-face activity\, this includes signing in on arrival and signing out at the conclusion of the activity in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being absent from the activity for more than 15 minutes. For those participating via the webinar\, this includes logging in at the start of the webinar and logging out at the conclusion of the webinar in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being away from the activity for more than 15 minutes. Participants who do not comply with the Attendance Policy will not be able to obtain CPD Points for attending the activity. Please refer to https://www.silecpdcentre.sg for more information. Practice Area: Alternative Dispute Resolution Training Category: General 						\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Earn 1 Public CPD Point		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Terms & Conditions		\n				\n				\n				\n							1) Registration – Limited slots are available on a first-come-first-served basis. 2) Consent to data collection – You consent for Maxwell Chambers and their partners to collect\, use and disclose the personal data that you provide in this form for marketing purposes\, including adding you to their mailing list for industry updates. The Organiser reserves the right to cancel or alter the content and timing of the programme or the identity of the speakers. In the event that the webinar is cancelled by the Organiser\, the participants will be notified prior to the webinar. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Share		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n								\n						\n															\n																Share on facebook\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on twitter\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on linkedin\n							\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on whatsapp\n							\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.tickettailor.com/events/societyofmediationprofessionals/1890367#new_tab
LOCATION:Singapore
CATEGORIES:Happenings by Maxwell Chambers,Networking
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/SMP-Logo.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20251204
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20251205
DTSTAMP:20260620T115842
CREATED:20251203T100715Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20251203T100715Z
UID:10000750-1764806400-1764892799@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:5 Questions With Maxwell Interview Series: Cherine Foty\, Global Co-Chair of the Campaign for Greener Arbitrations
DESCRIPTION:Event Details		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Maxwell Conversations: Managing Public Policy | 29 August 2024		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n				\n				\n							Maxwell Conversations features leading personalities at the top of the international dispute resolution industry. These events seek to challenge assumptions with a deeper examination of the issues. Synposis  Public policy is an important element in determining the arbitrability of a dispute\, and also a ground on which an award may be annulled or refused enforcement. It has often been said that the public policy should be construed narrowly in keeping with the pro-arbitration policy of the New York Convention or the UNCITRAL Model Law. Held as part of Singapore Convention Week\, this session of Maxwell Conversations focused on the crucial role of public policy in international arbitration. The discussion highlighted how public policy influences the arbitrability of disputes and serves as grounds for annulling or refusing the enforcement of an award. While it is commonly understood that public policy should be interpreted narrowly\, aligning with the pro-arbitration stance of the New York Convention and UNCITRAL Model Law\, the event also shed light on less frequently discussed topics. The panel explored the importance of arbitrator independence and seat court review\, which are considered part of the “international public policy” of arbitration. This was contrasted with how courts may enforce annulled awards if they deem the annulment contrary to their own national public policy\, touching on issues like crime\, corruption\, or sovereignty. The discussion raised important questions about whether international and national public policies are opposing forces or if enforcing courts should consider multiple layers of public policy\, including the public policies of the governing law\, the seat of arbitration\, and how to navigate conflicts between these different frameworks. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n				\n				\n							The books referenced by Michael at the start of the session are: \n\nThe Public Policy Exception under the New York Convention\, Second Edition by Anton G. Maurer\nICCA’s Guide to the Interpretation of the 1958 New York Convention\, Second Edition\nGuide on the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards\, New York 1958 by the UNCITRAL Secretariat\n\nAdditional reference materials include: \n\nRe-calibration of curial intervention in public policy challenges against arbitral awards” written by Darius Chan and Elias Ngai of the Singapore Management University in the Journal of International Arbitration\n						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Q&A from the Lecture:		\n				\n				\n				\n							Q1: What are the potential challenges in the future for issuing arbitral awards? Are there any changes in environment or technology that may mitigate or worsen these challenges? \nQ2: What aspects of arbitration are ready for AI? \nQ3: What do you think are the key issues that need to be considered when using technology? \nQ4: About diversity\, I notice that the ICC now has an almost 50/50 male/female mix. Is this too fast and too artificial? \nQ5: For operating with ICC arbitration\, since the publishing of the ICC arbitration rules 2021 in the year of 2021\, which part of the arbitration rules 2021 would ICC suggest multi-national companies\, future expert witnesses\, future party representatives and future arbitrators to pay attention to as per ICC’s observation so far? \nQ6: What would ICC like expert witnesses\, party representatives\, and arbitrators to do (and prepare themselves) in order to operate ICC arbitration in line with ICC’s vision?  						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Watch the full recorded session below:		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										29 August 2024\, Thursday \n									\n								\n											\n													\n										8.00 am – 9:30 am (GMT+8)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										Singapore\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Organiser: Maxwell Chambers\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Format: Hybrid (In-person at Maxwell Chambers\, Online over Zoom)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																\n															\n															\n				\n				\n				\n					\n			\n							\n								\n							\n						\n				\n					CategoryFee (SGD)				\n			\n					\n					\n				\n			YouTube Livestreaming TicketFreeZoom Webinar Ticket$30*		\n					\n		\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Speakers		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Dr Michael Hwang		\n				\n				\n				\n							Dr Michael Hwang S.C. currently practises as an international arbitrator based in Singapore with a selective practice as Senior Counsel of the Supreme Court of Singapore. He served as the Chief Justice of the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) Courts from 2010 – 2018.   Dr Hwang’s other past appointments include: Judicial Commissioner of the Supreme Court of Singapore; Singapore’s Non-Resident Ambassador to Switzerland and Argentina; President of the Law Society of Singapore; Commissioner of the United Nations Compensation Commission; Vice Chairman of the ICC International Court of Arbitration; Vice President of the International Council of Commercial Arbitration (ICCA); and a Visiting (and later Adjunct) Professor of the National University of Singapore. He was educated at undergraduate and postgraduate levels at Oxford University\, where he won the Gordon Warter Scholarship from Pembroke College by open competitive examination. He has been conferred an Honorary LLD by the University of Sydney. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Jessica Fei		\n				\n				\n				\n							Jessica is a widely recognized leading international arbitration and dispute resolution specialist with close to 30 years’ experience working with international arbitration institutions and leading firms.  Constantly ranked and recommended by leading legal media including Chambers\, WWL\, Legal 500\, and ALB\, Jessica is one of the very few leading international arbitration practitioners (acting as counsel and arbitrator)  with dual qualifications (China and New York) as well as extensive cross-border dispute resolution experience between Chinese/Asian and Western parties. Jessica focuses her practice on international arbitration\, litigation and alternative disputes resolution. She sits regularly as arbitrator in commercial arbitration cases\, and is listed on the international arbitrator panels of the SIAC\, HKIAC\, CIETAC\, ICDR/AAA\, AIAC\, KCAB\, CEAC etc. Jessica is a court member of SIAC Court of Arbitration\, a member of the International/ Asia Advisory Committee of the AAA/ICDR\, a member of the CEAC Advisory Board\, VP of the UIA Litigation Committee and China Chapter Chair of NYSBA International Section. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Sae Youn Kim		\n				\n				\n				\n							Sae Youn Kim is a partner of the International Arbitration & Cross-Border Litigation Practice of Kim & Chang. Ms. Kim practices primarily in the areas of international litigation and arbitration with an emphasis on commercial and international law. Before joining Kim & Chang\, she served as a judge at various Korean district courts\, and practiced as a key member in major Korean law firms. Ms. Kim also sits as an arbitrator. Her expertise in international dispute resolution has been recognized by the variety of roles she holds and held in various institutions\, including but not limited to a Commissioner of the Korea Trade Commission\, a Vice-Chair of the Arbitration Committee of the International Bar Association\, a Co-Chair of the Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Committee of the Inter-Pacific Bar Association\, and a member of the ICC Court. She is regularly selected as leading lawyer by publications such as Chambers and Partners\, Who’s Who Legal\, Legal 500\, and Asian Legal Business. Ms. Kim received an LL.M. from Duke University Law School in 2007\, and her LL.B. from Seoul National University College of Law in 1991. She graduated the Judicial Training and Research Institute by the Supreme Court of Korea in 1994. She speaks and practices in both Korean and English. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Vijayendra Pratap Singh		\n				\n				\n				\n							With over 20 years of experience\, Vijayendra Pratap Singh heads the Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice in Delhi. Vijayendra represents clients in international\, commercial and domestic arbitrations; corporate and commercial litigation; regulatory practices and securities law. He has advised various government departments\, such as the Department of Economic Affairs\, Ministry of Finance; Securities and Exchange Board of India; Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation; the Ministry of Consumer Affairs\, etc.\, on the de-criminalisation of various Statutes and has been involved in various policy making initiatives of the Government of India. Vijayendra’s expertise span domestic and international arbitration\, as well as disputes in various fora in India\, ranging from shareholder disputes to corporate actions. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Lawrence Teh (Moderator)		\n				\n				\n				\n							Lawrence Teh is the Global Co-Head of Dentons’ International Arbitration practice and a senior partner in Dentons Rodyk’s Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice group. He is Co-Head of Dentons Rodyk’s International Arbitration and Shipping practice groups. He has particular experience in handling commercial disputes including those of international trade and commodities\, maritime and aviation\, banking and financial services\, onshore and offshore construction\, mergers\, acquisitions\, joint ventures and other investments\, and insurance. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Attendance Policy		\n				\n				\n				\n							Participants who wish to obtain CPD Points are reminded that they must comply strictly with the Attendance Policy set out in the CPD Guidelines. For participants attending the face-to-face activity\, this includes signing in on arrival and signing out at the conclusion of the activity in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being absent from the activity for more than 15 minutes. For those participating via the webinar\, this includes logging in at the start of the webinar and logging out at the conclusion of the webinar in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being away from the activity for more than 15 minutes. Participants who do not comply with the Attendance Policy will not be able to obtain CPD Points for attending the activity. Please refer to https://www.silecpdcentre.sg for more information. Practice Area: Alternative Dispute Resolution Training Category: General 						\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Earn 1 Public CPD Point		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Terms & Conditions		\n				\n				\n				\n							1) Registration – Limited slots are available on a first-come-first-served basis. 2) Consent to data collection – You consent for Maxwell Chambers and their partners to collect\, use and disclose the personal data that you provide in this form for marketing purposes\, including adding you to their mailing list for industry updates. The Organiser reserves the right to cancel or alter the content and timing of the programme or the identity of the speakers. In the event that the webinar is cancelled by the Organiser\, the participants will be notified prior to the webinar. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Share		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n								\n						\n															\n																Share on facebook\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on twitter\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on linkedin\n							\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on whatsapp\n							\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/2025/12/04/5questionswithmaxwell-green-edition-cherine-foty/#new_tab
LOCATION:Singapore
CATEGORIES:Happenings by Maxwell Chambers
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/QA-5-7-Cherine-Foty-Banner-scaled.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20260119
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20260120
DTSTAMP:20260620T115843
CREATED:20260119T024531Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20260119T024531Z
UID:10000809-1768780800-1768867199@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:10 Questions With Maxwell Interview Series: Ashwita Ambast\, Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA)
DESCRIPTION:Event Details		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Maxwell Conversations: Managing Public Policy | 29 August 2024		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n				\n				\n							Maxwell Conversations features leading personalities at the top of the international dispute resolution industry. These events seek to challenge assumptions with a deeper examination of the issues. Synposis  Public policy is an important element in determining the arbitrability of a dispute\, and also a ground on which an award may be annulled or refused enforcement. It has often been said that the public policy should be construed narrowly in keeping with the pro-arbitration policy of the New York Convention or the UNCITRAL Model Law. Held as part of Singapore Convention Week\, this session of Maxwell Conversations focused on the crucial role of public policy in international arbitration. The discussion highlighted how public policy influences the arbitrability of disputes and serves as grounds for annulling or refusing the enforcement of an award. While it is commonly understood that public policy should be interpreted narrowly\, aligning with the pro-arbitration stance of the New York Convention and UNCITRAL Model Law\, the event also shed light on less frequently discussed topics. The panel explored the importance of arbitrator independence and seat court review\, which are considered part of the “international public policy” of arbitration. This was contrasted with how courts may enforce annulled awards if they deem the annulment contrary to their own national public policy\, touching on issues like crime\, corruption\, or sovereignty. The discussion raised important questions about whether international and national public policies are opposing forces or if enforcing courts should consider multiple layers of public policy\, including the public policies of the governing law\, the seat of arbitration\, and how to navigate conflicts between these different frameworks. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n				\n				\n							The books referenced by Michael at the start of the session are: \n\nThe Public Policy Exception under the New York Convention\, Second Edition by Anton G. Maurer\nICCA’s Guide to the Interpretation of the 1958 New York Convention\, Second Edition\nGuide on the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards\, New York 1958 by the UNCITRAL Secretariat\n\nAdditional reference materials include: \n\nRe-calibration of curial intervention in public policy challenges against arbitral awards” written by Darius Chan and Elias Ngai of the Singapore Management University in the Journal of International Arbitration\n						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Q&A from the Lecture:		\n				\n				\n				\n							Q1: What are the potential challenges in the future for issuing arbitral awards? Are there any changes in environment or technology that may mitigate or worsen these challenges? \nQ2: What aspects of arbitration are ready for AI? \nQ3: What do you think are the key issues that need to be considered when using technology? \nQ4: About diversity\, I notice that the ICC now has an almost 50/50 male/female mix. Is this too fast and too artificial? \nQ5: For operating with ICC arbitration\, since the publishing of the ICC arbitration rules 2021 in the year of 2021\, which part of the arbitration rules 2021 would ICC suggest multi-national companies\, future expert witnesses\, future party representatives and future arbitrators to pay attention to as per ICC’s observation so far? \nQ6: What would ICC like expert witnesses\, party representatives\, and arbitrators to do (and prepare themselves) in order to operate ICC arbitration in line with ICC’s vision?  						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Watch the full recorded session below:		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										29 August 2024\, Thursday \n									\n								\n											\n													\n										8.00 am – 9:30 am (GMT+8)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										Singapore\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Organiser: Maxwell Chambers\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Format: Hybrid (In-person at Maxwell Chambers\, Online over Zoom)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																\n															\n															\n				\n				\n				\n					\n			\n							\n								\n							\n						\n				\n					CategoryFee (SGD)				\n			\n					\n					\n				\n			YouTube Livestreaming TicketFreeZoom Webinar Ticket$30*		\n					\n		\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Speakers		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Dr Michael Hwang		\n				\n				\n				\n							Dr Michael Hwang S.C. currently practises as an international arbitrator based in Singapore with a selective practice as Senior Counsel of the Supreme Court of Singapore. He served as the Chief Justice of the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) Courts from 2010 – 2018.   Dr Hwang’s other past appointments include: Judicial Commissioner of the Supreme Court of Singapore; Singapore’s Non-Resident Ambassador to Switzerland and Argentina; President of the Law Society of Singapore; Commissioner of the United Nations Compensation Commission; Vice Chairman of the ICC International Court of Arbitration; Vice President of the International Council of Commercial Arbitration (ICCA); and a Visiting (and later Adjunct) Professor of the National University of Singapore. He was educated at undergraduate and postgraduate levels at Oxford University\, where he won the Gordon Warter Scholarship from Pembroke College by open competitive examination. He has been conferred an Honorary LLD by the University of Sydney. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Jessica Fei		\n				\n				\n				\n							Jessica is a widely recognized leading international arbitration and dispute resolution specialist with close to 30 years’ experience working with international arbitration institutions and leading firms.  Constantly ranked and recommended by leading legal media including Chambers\, WWL\, Legal 500\, and ALB\, Jessica is one of the very few leading international arbitration practitioners (acting as counsel and arbitrator)  with dual qualifications (China and New York) as well as extensive cross-border dispute resolution experience between Chinese/Asian and Western parties. Jessica focuses her practice on international arbitration\, litigation and alternative disputes resolution. She sits regularly as arbitrator in commercial arbitration cases\, and is listed on the international arbitrator panels of the SIAC\, HKIAC\, CIETAC\, ICDR/AAA\, AIAC\, KCAB\, CEAC etc. Jessica is a court member of SIAC Court of Arbitration\, a member of the International/ Asia Advisory Committee of the AAA/ICDR\, a member of the CEAC Advisory Board\, VP of the UIA Litigation Committee and China Chapter Chair of NYSBA International Section. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Sae Youn Kim		\n				\n				\n				\n							Sae Youn Kim is a partner of the International Arbitration & Cross-Border Litigation Practice of Kim & Chang. Ms. Kim practices primarily in the areas of international litigation and arbitration with an emphasis on commercial and international law. Before joining Kim & Chang\, she served as a judge at various Korean district courts\, and practiced as a key member in major Korean law firms. Ms. Kim also sits as an arbitrator. Her expertise in international dispute resolution has been recognized by the variety of roles she holds and held in various institutions\, including but not limited to a Commissioner of the Korea Trade Commission\, a Vice-Chair of the Arbitration Committee of the International Bar Association\, a Co-Chair of the Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Committee of the Inter-Pacific Bar Association\, and a member of the ICC Court. She is regularly selected as leading lawyer by publications such as Chambers and Partners\, Who’s Who Legal\, Legal 500\, and Asian Legal Business. Ms. Kim received an LL.M. from Duke University Law School in 2007\, and her LL.B. from Seoul National University College of Law in 1991. She graduated the Judicial Training and Research Institute by the Supreme Court of Korea in 1994. She speaks and practices in both Korean and English. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Vijayendra Pratap Singh		\n				\n				\n				\n							With over 20 years of experience\, Vijayendra Pratap Singh heads the Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice in Delhi. Vijayendra represents clients in international\, commercial and domestic arbitrations; corporate and commercial litigation; regulatory practices and securities law. He has advised various government departments\, such as the Department of Economic Affairs\, Ministry of Finance; Securities and Exchange Board of India; Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation; the Ministry of Consumer Affairs\, etc.\, on the de-criminalisation of various Statutes and has been involved in various policy making initiatives of the Government of India. Vijayendra’s expertise span domestic and international arbitration\, as well as disputes in various fora in India\, ranging from shareholder disputes to corporate actions. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Lawrence Teh (Moderator)		\n				\n				\n				\n							Lawrence Teh is the Global Co-Head of Dentons’ International Arbitration practice and a senior partner in Dentons Rodyk’s Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice group. He is Co-Head of Dentons Rodyk’s International Arbitration and Shipping practice groups. He has particular experience in handling commercial disputes including those of international trade and commodities\, maritime and aviation\, banking and financial services\, onshore and offshore construction\, mergers\, acquisitions\, joint ventures and other investments\, and insurance. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Attendance Policy		\n				\n				\n				\n							Participants who wish to obtain CPD Points are reminded that they must comply strictly with the Attendance Policy set out in the CPD Guidelines. For participants attending the face-to-face activity\, this includes signing in on arrival and signing out at the conclusion of the activity in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being absent from the activity for more than 15 minutes. For those participating via the webinar\, this includes logging in at the start of the webinar and logging out at the conclusion of the webinar in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being away from the activity for more than 15 minutes. Participants who do not comply with the Attendance Policy will not be able to obtain CPD Points for attending the activity. Please refer to https://www.silecpdcentre.sg for more information. Practice Area: Alternative Dispute Resolution Training Category: General 						\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Earn 1 Public CPD Point		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Terms & Conditions		\n				\n				\n				\n							1) Registration – Limited slots are available on a first-come-first-served basis. 2) Consent to data collection – You consent for Maxwell Chambers and their partners to collect\, use and disclose the personal data that you provide in this form for marketing purposes\, including adding you to their mailing list for industry updates. The Organiser reserves the right to cancel or alter the content and timing of the programme or the identity of the speakers. In the event that the webinar is cancelled by the Organiser\, the participants will be notified prior to the webinar. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Share		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n								\n						\n															\n																Share on facebook\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on twitter\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on linkedin\n							\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on whatsapp\n							\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/2026/01/19/10questionswithmaxwell-interview-series-ashwita-ambast-permanent-court-of-arbitration-pca/#new_tab
LOCATION:Singapore
CATEGORIES:Happenings by Maxwell Chambers
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/Ashwita-Ambast-Edition-1.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20260129
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20260130
DTSTAMP:20260620T115843
CREATED:20260129T035134Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20260129T035551Z
UID:10000817-1769644800-1769731199@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:Maxwell En-Route: Chiann Bao with Daniel Kalderimis KC [Season 4\, Episode 1]
DESCRIPTION:Event Details		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Maxwell Conversations: Managing Public Policy | 29 August 2024		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n				\n				\n							Maxwell Conversations features leading personalities at the top of the international dispute resolution industry. These events seek to challenge assumptions with a deeper examination of the issues. Synposis  Public policy is an important element in determining the arbitrability of a dispute\, and also a ground on which an award may be annulled or refused enforcement. It has often been said that the public policy should be construed narrowly in keeping with the pro-arbitration policy of the New York Convention or the UNCITRAL Model Law. Held as part of Singapore Convention Week\, this session of Maxwell Conversations focused on the crucial role of public policy in international arbitration. The discussion highlighted how public policy influences the arbitrability of disputes and serves as grounds for annulling or refusing the enforcement of an award. While it is commonly understood that public policy should be interpreted narrowly\, aligning with the pro-arbitration stance of the New York Convention and UNCITRAL Model Law\, the event also shed light on less frequently discussed topics. The panel explored the importance of arbitrator independence and seat court review\, which are considered part of the “international public policy” of arbitration. This was contrasted with how courts may enforce annulled awards if they deem the annulment contrary to their own national public policy\, touching on issues like crime\, corruption\, or sovereignty. The discussion raised important questions about whether international and national public policies are opposing forces or if enforcing courts should consider multiple layers of public policy\, including the public policies of the governing law\, the seat of arbitration\, and how to navigate conflicts between these different frameworks. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n				\n				\n							The books referenced by Michael at the start of the session are: \n\nThe Public Policy Exception under the New York Convention\, Second Edition by Anton G. Maurer\nICCA’s Guide to the Interpretation of the 1958 New York Convention\, Second Edition\nGuide on the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards\, New York 1958 by the UNCITRAL Secretariat\n\nAdditional reference materials include: \n\nRe-calibration of curial intervention in public policy challenges against arbitral awards” written by Darius Chan and Elias Ngai of the Singapore Management University in the Journal of International Arbitration\n						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Q&A from the Lecture:		\n				\n				\n				\n							Q1: What are the potential challenges in the future for issuing arbitral awards? Are there any changes in environment or technology that may mitigate or worsen these challenges? \nQ2: What aspects of arbitration are ready for AI? \nQ3: What do you think are the key issues that need to be considered when using technology? \nQ4: About diversity\, I notice that the ICC now has an almost 50/50 male/female mix. Is this too fast and too artificial? \nQ5: For operating with ICC arbitration\, since the publishing of the ICC arbitration rules 2021 in the year of 2021\, which part of the arbitration rules 2021 would ICC suggest multi-national companies\, future expert witnesses\, future party representatives and future arbitrators to pay attention to as per ICC’s observation so far? \nQ6: What would ICC like expert witnesses\, party representatives\, and arbitrators to do (and prepare themselves) in order to operate ICC arbitration in line with ICC’s vision?  						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Watch the full recorded session below:		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										29 August 2024\, Thursday \n									\n								\n											\n													\n										8.00 am – 9:30 am (GMT+8)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										Singapore\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Organiser: Maxwell Chambers\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Format: Hybrid (In-person at Maxwell Chambers\, Online over Zoom)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																\n															\n															\n				\n				\n				\n					\n			\n							\n								\n							\n						\n				\n					CategoryFee (SGD)				\n			\n					\n					\n				\n			YouTube Livestreaming TicketFreeZoom Webinar Ticket$30*		\n					\n		\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Speakers		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Dr Michael Hwang		\n				\n				\n				\n							Dr Michael Hwang S.C. currently practises as an international arbitrator based in Singapore with a selective practice as Senior Counsel of the Supreme Court of Singapore. He served as the Chief Justice of the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) Courts from 2010 – 2018.   Dr Hwang’s other past appointments include: Judicial Commissioner of the Supreme Court of Singapore; Singapore’s Non-Resident Ambassador to Switzerland and Argentina; President of the Law Society of Singapore; Commissioner of the United Nations Compensation Commission; Vice Chairman of the ICC International Court of Arbitration; Vice President of the International Council of Commercial Arbitration (ICCA); and a Visiting (and later Adjunct) Professor of the National University of Singapore. He was educated at undergraduate and postgraduate levels at Oxford University\, where he won the Gordon Warter Scholarship from Pembroke College by open competitive examination. He has been conferred an Honorary LLD by the University of Sydney. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Jessica Fei		\n				\n				\n				\n							Jessica is a widely recognized leading international arbitration and dispute resolution specialist with close to 30 years’ experience working with international arbitration institutions and leading firms.  Constantly ranked and recommended by leading legal media including Chambers\, WWL\, Legal 500\, and ALB\, Jessica is one of the very few leading international arbitration practitioners (acting as counsel and arbitrator)  with dual qualifications (China and New York) as well as extensive cross-border dispute resolution experience between Chinese/Asian and Western parties. Jessica focuses her practice on international arbitration\, litigation and alternative disputes resolution. She sits regularly as arbitrator in commercial arbitration cases\, and is listed on the international arbitrator panels of the SIAC\, HKIAC\, CIETAC\, ICDR/AAA\, AIAC\, KCAB\, CEAC etc. Jessica is a court member of SIAC Court of Arbitration\, a member of the International/ Asia Advisory Committee of the AAA/ICDR\, a member of the CEAC Advisory Board\, VP of the UIA Litigation Committee and China Chapter Chair of NYSBA International Section. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Sae Youn Kim		\n				\n				\n				\n							Sae Youn Kim is a partner of the International Arbitration & Cross-Border Litigation Practice of Kim & Chang. Ms. Kim practices primarily in the areas of international litigation and arbitration with an emphasis on commercial and international law. Before joining Kim & Chang\, she served as a judge at various Korean district courts\, and practiced as a key member in major Korean law firms. Ms. Kim also sits as an arbitrator. Her expertise in international dispute resolution has been recognized by the variety of roles she holds and held in various institutions\, including but not limited to a Commissioner of the Korea Trade Commission\, a Vice-Chair of the Arbitration Committee of the International Bar Association\, a Co-Chair of the Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Committee of the Inter-Pacific Bar Association\, and a member of the ICC Court. She is regularly selected as leading lawyer by publications such as Chambers and Partners\, Who’s Who Legal\, Legal 500\, and Asian Legal Business. Ms. Kim received an LL.M. from Duke University Law School in 2007\, and her LL.B. from Seoul National University College of Law in 1991. She graduated the Judicial Training and Research Institute by the Supreme Court of Korea in 1994. She speaks and practices in both Korean and English. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Vijayendra Pratap Singh		\n				\n				\n				\n							With over 20 years of experience\, Vijayendra Pratap Singh heads the Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice in Delhi. Vijayendra represents clients in international\, commercial and domestic arbitrations; corporate and commercial litigation; regulatory practices and securities law. He has advised various government departments\, such as the Department of Economic Affairs\, Ministry of Finance; Securities and Exchange Board of India; Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation; the Ministry of Consumer Affairs\, etc.\, on the de-criminalisation of various Statutes and has been involved in various policy making initiatives of the Government of India. Vijayendra’s expertise span domestic and international arbitration\, as well as disputes in various fora in India\, ranging from shareholder disputes to corporate actions. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Lawrence Teh (Moderator)		\n				\n				\n				\n							Lawrence Teh is the Global Co-Head of Dentons’ International Arbitration practice and a senior partner in Dentons Rodyk’s Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice group. He is Co-Head of Dentons Rodyk’s International Arbitration and Shipping practice groups. He has particular experience in handling commercial disputes including those of international trade and commodities\, maritime and aviation\, banking and financial services\, onshore and offshore construction\, mergers\, acquisitions\, joint ventures and other investments\, and insurance. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Attendance Policy		\n				\n				\n				\n							Participants who wish to obtain CPD Points are reminded that they must comply strictly with the Attendance Policy set out in the CPD Guidelines. For participants attending the face-to-face activity\, this includes signing in on arrival and signing out at the conclusion of the activity in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being absent from the activity for more than 15 minutes. For those participating via the webinar\, this includes logging in at the start of the webinar and logging out at the conclusion of the webinar in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being away from the activity for more than 15 minutes. Participants who do not comply with the Attendance Policy will not be able to obtain CPD Points for attending the activity. Please refer to https://www.silecpdcentre.sg for more information. Practice Area: Alternative Dispute Resolution Training Category: General 						\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Earn 1 Public CPD Point		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Terms & Conditions		\n				\n				\n				\n							1) Registration – Limited slots are available on a first-come-first-served basis. 2) Consent to data collection – You consent for Maxwell Chambers and their partners to collect\, use and disclose the personal data that you provide in this form for marketing purposes\, including adding you to their mailing list for industry updates. The Organiser reserves the right to cancel or alter the content and timing of the programme or the identity of the speakers. In the event that the webinar is cancelled by the Organiser\, the participants will be notified prior to the webinar. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Share		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n								\n						\n															\n																Share on facebook\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on twitter\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on linkedin\n							\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on whatsapp\n							\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/maxwell-enroute/#new_tab
LOCATION:Singapore
CATEGORIES:Happenings by Maxwell Chambers
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/Season-4-Daniel-Kalderimis.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20260226
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20260227
DTSTAMP:20260620T115844
CREATED:20260226T050316Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20260226T050316Z
UID:10000837-1772064000-1772150399@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:Maxwell En-Route: Koh Swee Yen SC with Duncan Watson KC [Season 4\, Episode 2]
DESCRIPTION:Event Details		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Maxwell Conversations: Managing Public Policy | 29 August 2024		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n				\n				\n							Maxwell Conversations features leading personalities at the top of the international dispute resolution industry. These events seek to challenge assumptions with a deeper examination of the issues. Synposis  Public policy is an important element in determining the arbitrability of a dispute\, and also a ground on which an award may be annulled or refused enforcement. It has often been said that the public policy should be construed narrowly in keeping with the pro-arbitration policy of the New York Convention or the UNCITRAL Model Law. Held as part of Singapore Convention Week\, this session of Maxwell Conversations focused on the crucial role of public policy in international arbitration. The discussion highlighted how public policy influences the arbitrability of disputes and serves as grounds for annulling or refusing the enforcement of an award. While it is commonly understood that public policy should be interpreted narrowly\, aligning with the pro-arbitration stance of the New York Convention and UNCITRAL Model Law\, the event also shed light on less frequently discussed topics. The panel explored the importance of arbitrator independence and seat court review\, which are considered part of the “international public policy” of arbitration. This was contrasted with how courts may enforce annulled awards if they deem the annulment contrary to their own national public policy\, touching on issues like crime\, corruption\, or sovereignty. The discussion raised important questions about whether international and national public policies are opposing forces or if enforcing courts should consider multiple layers of public policy\, including the public policies of the governing law\, the seat of arbitration\, and how to navigate conflicts between these different frameworks. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n				\n				\n							The books referenced by Michael at the start of the session are: \n\nThe Public Policy Exception under the New York Convention\, Second Edition by Anton G. Maurer\nICCA’s Guide to the Interpretation of the 1958 New York Convention\, Second Edition\nGuide on the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards\, New York 1958 by the UNCITRAL Secretariat\n\nAdditional reference materials include: \n\nRe-calibration of curial intervention in public policy challenges against arbitral awards” written by Darius Chan and Elias Ngai of the Singapore Management University in the Journal of International Arbitration\n						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Q&A from the Lecture:		\n				\n				\n				\n							Q1: What are the potential challenges in the future for issuing arbitral awards? Are there any changes in environment or technology that may mitigate or worsen these challenges? \nQ2: What aspects of arbitration are ready for AI? \nQ3: What do you think are the key issues that need to be considered when using technology? \nQ4: About diversity\, I notice that the ICC now has an almost 50/50 male/female mix. Is this too fast and too artificial? \nQ5: For operating with ICC arbitration\, since the publishing of the ICC arbitration rules 2021 in the year of 2021\, which part of the arbitration rules 2021 would ICC suggest multi-national companies\, future expert witnesses\, future party representatives and future arbitrators to pay attention to as per ICC’s observation so far? \nQ6: What would ICC like expert witnesses\, party representatives\, and arbitrators to do (and prepare themselves) in order to operate ICC arbitration in line with ICC’s vision?  						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Watch the full recorded session below:		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										29 August 2024\, Thursday \n									\n								\n											\n													\n										8.00 am – 9:30 am (GMT+8)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										Singapore\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Organiser: Maxwell Chambers\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Format: Hybrid (In-person at Maxwell Chambers\, Online over Zoom)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																\n															\n															\n				\n				\n				\n					\n			\n							\n								\n							\n						\n				\n					CategoryFee (SGD)				\n			\n					\n					\n				\n			YouTube Livestreaming TicketFreeZoom Webinar Ticket$30*		\n					\n		\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Speakers		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Dr Michael Hwang		\n				\n				\n				\n							Dr Michael Hwang S.C. currently practises as an international arbitrator based in Singapore with a selective practice as Senior Counsel of the Supreme Court of Singapore. He served as the Chief Justice of the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) Courts from 2010 – 2018.   Dr Hwang’s other past appointments include: Judicial Commissioner of the Supreme Court of Singapore; Singapore’s Non-Resident Ambassador to Switzerland and Argentina; President of the Law Society of Singapore; Commissioner of the United Nations Compensation Commission; Vice Chairman of the ICC International Court of Arbitration; Vice President of the International Council of Commercial Arbitration (ICCA); and a Visiting (and later Adjunct) Professor of the National University of Singapore. He was educated at undergraduate and postgraduate levels at Oxford University\, where he won the Gordon Warter Scholarship from Pembroke College by open competitive examination. He has been conferred an Honorary LLD by the University of Sydney. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Jessica Fei		\n				\n				\n				\n							Jessica is a widely recognized leading international arbitration and dispute resolution specialist with close to 30 years’ experience working with international arbitration institutions and leading firms.  Constantly ranked and recommended by leading legal media including Chambers\, WWL\, Legal 500\, and ALB\, Jessica is one of the very few leading international arbitration practitioners (acting as counsel and arbitrator)  with dual qualifications (China and New York) as well as extensive cross-border dispute resolution experience between Chinese/Asian and Western parties. Jessica focuses her practice on international arbitration\, litigation and alternative disputes resolution. She sits regularly as arbitrator in commercial arbitration cases\, and is listed on the international arbitrator panels of the SIAC\, HKIAC\, CIETAC\, ICDR/AAA\, AIAC\, KCAB\, CEAC etc. Jessica is a court member of SIAC Court of Arbitration\, a member of the International/ Asia Advisory Committee of the AAA/ICDR\, a member of the CEAC Advisory Board\, VP of the UIA Litigation Committee and China Chapter Chair of NYSBA International Section. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Sae Youn Kim		\n				\n				\n				\n							Sae Youn Kim is a partner of the International Arbitration & Cross-Border Litigation Practice of Kim & Chang. Ms. Kim practices primarily in the areas of international litigation and arbitration with an emphasis on commercial and international law. Before joining Kim & Chang\, she served as a judge at various Korean district courts\, and practiced as a key member in major Korean law firms. Ms. Kim also sits as an arbitrator. Her expertise in international dispute resolution has been recognized by the variety of roles she holds and held in various institutions\, including but not limited to a Commissioner of the Korea Trade Commission\, a Vice-Chair of the Arbitration Committee of the International Bar Association\, a Co-Chair of the Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Committee of the Inter-Pacific Bar Association\, and a member of the ICC Court. She is regularly selected as leading lawyer by publications such as Chambers and Partners\, Who’s Who Legal\, Legal 500\, and Asian Legal Business. Ms. Kim received an LL.M. from Duke University Law School in 2007\, and her LL.B. from Seoul National University College of Law in 1991. She graduated the Judicial Training and Research Institute by the Supreme Court of Korea in 1994. She speaks and practices in both Korean and English. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Vijayendra Pratap Singh		\n				\n				\n				\n							With over 20 years of experience\, Vijayendra Pratap Singh heads the Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice in Delhi. Vijayendra represents clients in international\, commercial and domestic arbitrations; corporate and commercial litigation; regulatory practices and securities law. He has advised various government departments\, such as the Department of Economic Affairs\, Ministry of Finance; Securities and Exchange Board of India; Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation; the Ministry of Consumer Affairs\, etc.\, on the de-criminalisation of various Statutes and has been involved in various policy making initiatives of the Government of India. Vijayendra’s expertise span domestic and international arbitration\, as well as disputes in various fora in India\, ranging from shareholder disputes to corporate actions. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Lawrence Teh (Moderator)		\n				\n				\n				\n							Lawrence Teh is the Global Co-Head of Dentons’ International Arbitration practice and a senior partner in Dentons Rodyk’s Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice group. He is Co-Head of Dentons Rodyk’s International Arbitration and Shipping practice groups. He has particular experience in handling commercial disputes including those of international trade and commodities\, maritime and aviation\, banking and financial services\, onshore and offshore construction\, mergers\, acquisitions\, joint ventures and other investments\, and insurance. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Attendance Policy		\n				\n				\n				\n							Participants who wish to obtain CPD Points are reminded that they must comply strictly with the Attendance Policy set out in the CPD Guidelines. For participants attending the face-to-face activity\, this includes signing in on arrival and signing out at the conclusion of the activity in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being absent from the activity for more than 15 minutes. For those participating via the webinar\, this includes logging in at the start of the webinar and logging out at the conclusion of the webinar in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being away from the activity for more than 15 minutes. Participants who do not comply with the Attendance Policy will not be able to obtain CPD Points for attending the activity. Please refer to https://www.silecpdcentre.sg for more information. Practice Area: Alternative Dispute Resolution Training Category: General 						\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Earn 1 Public CPD Point		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Terms & Conditions		\n				\n				\n				\n							1) Registration – Limited slots are available on a first-come-first-served basis. 2) Consent to data collection – You consent for Maxwell Chambers and their partners to collect\, use and disclose the personal data that you provide in this form for marketing purposes\, including adding you to their mailing list for industry updates. The Organiser reserves the right to cancel or alter the content and timing of the programme or the identity of the speakers. In the event that the webinar is cancelled by the Organiser\, the participants will be notified prior to the webinar. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Share		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n								\n						\n															\n																Share on facebook\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on twitter\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on linkedin\n							\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on whatsapp\n							\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/maxwell-enroute/#new_tab
LOCATION:Singapore
CATEGORIES:Happenings by Maxwell Chambers
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/season-4-duncan-watson-kc.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Singapore:20260304T123000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Singapore:20260304T133000
DTSTAMP:20260620T115844
CREATED:20260130T073344Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20260223T012313Z
UID:10000820-1772627400-1772631000@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:The Power of Colour - Showing up with Confidence and Presence
DESCRIPTION:Event Details		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Maxwell Conversations: Managing Public Policy | 29 August 2024		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n				\n				\n							Maxwell Conversations features leading personalities at the top of the international dispute resolution industry. These events seek to challenge assumptions with a deeper examination of the issues. Synposis  Public policy is an important element in determining the arbitrability of a dispute\, and also a ground on which an award may be annulled or refused enforcement. It has often been said that the public policy should be construed narrowly in keeping with the pro-arbitration policy of the New York Convention or the UNCITRAL Model Law. Held as part of Singapore Convention Week\, this session of Maxwell Conversations focused on the crucial role of public policy in international arbitration. The discussion highlighted how public policy influences the arbitrability of disputes and serves as grounds for annulling or refusing the enforcement of an award. While it is commonly understood that public policy should be interpreted narrowly\, aligning with the pro-arbitration stance of the New York Convention and UNCITRAL Model Law\, the event also shed light on less frequently discussed topics. The panel explored the importance of arbitrator independence and seat court review\, which are considered part of the “international public policy” of arbitration. This was contrasted with how courts may enforce annulled awards if they deem the annulment contrary to their own national public policy\, touching on issues like crime\, corruption\, or sovereignty. The discussion raised important questions about whether international and national public policies are opposing forces or if enforcing courts should consider multiple layers of public policy\, including the public policies of the governing law\, the seat of arbitration\, and how to navigate conflicts between these different frameworks. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n				\n				\n							The books referenced by Michael at the start of the session are: \n\nThe Public Policy Exception under the New York Convention\, Second Edition by Anton G. Maurer\nICCA’s Guide to the Interpretation of the 1958 New York Convention\, Second Edition\nGuide on the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards\, New York 1958 by the UNCITRAL Secretariat\n\nAdditional reference materials include: \n\nRe-calibration of curial intervention in public policy challenges against arbitral awards” written by Darius Chan and Elias Ngai of the Singapore Management University in the Journal of International Arbitration\n						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Q&A from the Lecture:		\n				\n				\n				\n							Q1: What are the potential challenges in the future for issuing arbitral awards? Are there any changes in environment or technology that may mitigate or worsen these challenges? \nQ2: What aspects of arbitration are ready for AI? \nQ3: What do you think are the key issues that need to be considered when using technology? \nQ4: About diversity\, I notice that the ICC now has an almost 50/50 male/female mix. Is this too fast and too artificial? \nQ5: For operating with ICC arbitration\, since the publishing of the ICC arbitration rules 2021 in the year of 2021\, which part of the arbitration rules 2021 would ICC suggest multi-national companies\, future expert witnesses\, future party representatives and future arbitrators to pay attention to as per ICC’s observation so far? \nQ6: What would ICC like expert witnesses\, party representatives\, and arbitrators to do (and prepare themselves) in order to operate ICC arbitration in line with ICC’s vision?  						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Watch the full recorded session below:		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										29 August 2024\, Thursday \n									\n								\n											\n													\n										8.00 am – 9:30 am (GMT+8)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										Singapore\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Organiser: Maxwell Chambers\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Format: Hybrid (In-person at Maxwell Chambers\, Online over Zoom)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																\n															\n															\n				\n				\n				\n					\n			\n							\n								\n							\n						\n				\n					CategoryFee (SGD)				\n			\n					\n					\n				\n			YouTube Livestreaming TicketFreeZoom Webinar Ticket$30*		\n					\n		\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Speakers		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Dr Michael Hwang		\n				\n				\n				\n							Dr Michael Hwang S.C. currently practises as an international arbitrator based in Singapore with a selective practice as Senior Counsel of the Supreme Court of Singapore. He served as the Chief Justice of the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) Courts from 2010 – 2018.   Dr Hwang’s other past appointments include: Judicial Commissioner of the Supreme Court of Singapore; Singapore’s Non-Resident Ambassador to Switzerland and Argentina; President of the Law Society of Singapore; Commissioner of the United Nations Compensation Commission; Vice Chairman of the ICC International Court of Arbitration; Vice President of the International Council of Commercial Arbitration (ICCA); and a Visiting (and later Adjunct) Professor of the National University of Singapore. He was educated at undergraduate and postgraduate levels at Oxford University\, where he won the Gordon Warter Scholarship from Pembroke College by open competitive examination. He has been conferred an Honorary LLD by the University of Sydney. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Jessica Fei		\n				\n				\n				\n							Jessica is a widely recognized leading international arbitration and dispute resolution specialist with close to 30 years’ experience working with international arbitration institutions and leading firms.  Constantly ranked and recommended by leading legal media including Chambers\, WWL\, Legal 500\, and ALB\, Jessica is one of the very few leading international arbitration practitioners (acting as counsel and arbitrator)  with dual qualifications (China and New York) as well as extensive cross-border dispute resolution experience between Chinese/Asian and Western parties. Jessica focuses her practice on international arbitration\, litigation and alternative disputes resolution. She sits regularly as arbitrator in commercial arbitration cases\, and is listed on the international arbitrator panels of the SIAC\, HKIAC\, CIETAC\, ICDR/AAA\, AIAC\, KCAB\, CEAC etc. Jessica is a court member of SIAC Court of Arbitration\, a member of the International/ Asia Advisory Committee of the AAA/ICDR\, a member of the CEAC Advisory Board\, VP of the UIA Litigation Committee and China Chapter Chair of NYSBA International Section. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Sae Youn Kim		\n				\n				\n				\n							Sae Youn Kim is a partner of the International Arbitration & Cross-Border Litigation Practice of Kim & Chang. Ms. Kim practices primarily in the areas of international litigation and arbitration with an emphasis on commercial and international law. Before joining Kim & Chang\, she served as a judge at various Korean district courts\, and practiced as a key member in major Korean law firms. Ms. Kim also sits as an arbitrator. Her expertise in international dispute resolution has been recognized by the variety of roles she holds and held in various institutions\, including but not limited to a Commissioner of the Korea Trade Commission\, a Vice-Chair of the Arbitration Committee of the International Bar Association\, a Co-Chair of the Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Committee of the Inter-Pacific Bar Association\, and a member of the ICC Court. She is regularly selected as leading lawyer by publications such as Chambers and Partners\, Who’s Who Legal\, Legal 500\, and Asian Legal Business. Ms. Kim received an LL.M. from Duke University Law School in 2007\, and her LL.B. from Seoul National University College of Law in 1991. She graduated the Judicial Training and Research Institute by the Supreme Court of Korea in 1994. She speaks and practices in both Korean and English. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Vijayendra Pratap Singh		\n				\n				\n				\n							With over 20 years of experience\, Vijayendra Pratap Singh heads the Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice in Delhi. Vijayendra represents clients in international\, commercial and domestic arbitrations; corporate and commercial litigation; regulatory practices and securities law. He has advised various government departments\, such as the Department of Economic Affairs\, Ministry of Finance; Securities and Exchange Board of India; Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation; the Ministry of Consumer Affairs\, etc.\, on the de-criminalisation of various Statutes and has been involved in various policy making initiatives of the Government of India. Vijayendra’s expertise span domestic and international arbitration\, as well as disputes in various fora in India\, ranging from shareholder disputes to corporate actions. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Lawrence Teh (Moderator)		\n				\n				\n				\n							Lawrence Teh is the Global Co-Head of Dentons’ International Arbitration practice and a senior partner in Dentons Rodyk’s Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice group. He is Co-Head of Dentons Rodyk’s International Arbitration and Shipping practice groups. He has particular experience in handling commercial disputes including those of international trade and commodities\, maritime and aviation\, banking and financial services\, onshore and offshore construction\, mergers\, acquisitions\, joint ventures and other investments\, and insurance. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Attendance Policy		\n				\n				\n				\n							Participants who wish to obtain CPD Points are reminded that they must comply strictly with the Attendance Policy set out in the CPD Guidelines. For participants attending the face-to-face activity\, this includes signing in on arrival and signing out at the conclusion of the activity in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being absent from the activity for more than 15 minutes. For those participating via the webinar\, this includes logging in at the start of the webinar and logging out at the conclusion of the webinar in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being away from the activity for more than 15 minutes. Participants who do not comply with the Attendance Policy will not be able to obtain CPD Points for attending the activity. Please refer to https://www.silecpdcentre.sg for more information. Practice Area: Alternative Dispute Resolution Training Category: General 						\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Earn 1 Public CPD Point		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Terms & Conditions		\n				\n				\n				\n							1) Registration – Limited slots are available on a first-come-first-served basis. 2) Consent to data collection – You consent for Maxwell Chambers and their partners to collect\, use and disclose the personal data that you provide in this form for marketing purposes\, including adding you to their mailing list for industry updates. The Organiser reserves the right to cancel or alter the content and timing of the programme or the identity of the speakers. In the event that the webinar is cancelled by the Organiser\, the participants will be notified prior to the webinar. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Share		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n								\n						\n															\n																Share on facebook\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on twitter\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on linkedin\n							\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on whatsapp\n							\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/event/the-power-of-colour-showing-up-with-confidence-and-presence/
LOCATION:Singapore
CATEGORIES:Happenings by Maxwell Chambers
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/Colour-Workshop-4-March-LinkedIn-Single-Image-Ad-2.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20260305
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20260306
DTSTAMP:20260620T115845
CREATED:20260305T015914Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20260305T015914Z
UID:10000843-1772668800-1772755199@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:10 Questions With Maxwell Interview Series: Min Kyung Kim\, Des Voeux Chambers
DESCRIPTION:Event Details		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Maxwell Conversations: Managing Public Policy | 29 August 2024		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n				\n				\n							Maxwell Conversations features leading personalities at the top of the international dispute resolution industry. These events seek to challenge assumptions with a deeper examination of the issues. Synposis  Public policy is an important element in determining the arbitrability of a dispute\, and also a ground on which an award may be annulled or refused enforcement. It has often been said that the public policy should be construed narrowly in keeping with the pro-arbitration policy of the New York Convention or the UNCITRAL Model Law. Held as part of Singapore Convention Week\, this session of Maxwell Conversations focused on the crucial role of public policy in international arbitration. The discussion highlighted how public policy influences the arbitrability of disputes and serves as grounds for annulling or refusing the enforcement of an award. While it is commonly understood that public policy should be interpreted narrowly\, aligning with the pro-arbitration stance of the New York Convention and UNCITRAL Model Law\, the event also shed light on less frequently discussed topics. The panel explored the importance of arbitrator independence and seat court review\, which are considered part of the “international public policy” of arbitration. This was contrasted with how courts may enforce annulled awards if they deem the annulment contrary to their own national public policy\, touching on issues like crime\, corruption\, or sovereignty. The discussion raised important questions about whether international and national public policies are opposing forces or if enforcing courts should consider multiple layers of public policy\, including the public policies of the governing law\, the seat of arbitration\, and how to navigate conflicts between these different frameworks. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n				\n				\n							The books referenced by Michael at the start of the session are: \n\nThe Public Policy Exception under the New York Convention\, Second Edition by Anton G. Maurer\nICCA’s Guide to the Interpretation of the 1958 New York Convention\, Second Edition\nGuide on the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards\, New York 1958 by the UNCITRAL Secretariat\n\nAdditional reference materials include: \n\nRe-calibration of curial intervention in public policy challenges against arbitral awards” written by Darius Chan and Elias Ngai of the Singapore Management University in the Journal of International Arbitration\n						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Q&A from the Lecture:		\n				\n				\n				\n							Q1: What are the potential challenges in the future for issuing arbitral awards? Are there any changes in environment or technology that may mitigate or worsen these challenges? \nQ2: What aspects of arbitration are ready for AI? \nQ3: What do you think are the key issues that need to be considered when using technology? \nQ4: About diversity\, I notice that the ICC now has an almost 50/50 male/female mix. Is this too fast and too artificial? \nQ5: For operating with ICC arbitration\, since the publishing of the ICC arbitration rules 2021 in the year of 2021\, which part of the arbitration rules 2021 would ICC suggest multi-national companies\, future expert witnesses\, future party representatives and future arbitrators to pay attention to as per ICC’s observation so far? \nQ6: What would ICC like expert witnesses\, party representatives\, and arbitrators to do (and prepare themselves) in order to operate ICC arbitration in line with ICC’s vision?  						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Watch the full recorded session below:		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										29 August 2024\, Thursday \n									\n								\n											\n													\n										8.00 am – 9:30 am (GMT+8)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										Singapore\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Organiser: Maxwell Chambers\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Format: Hybrid (In-person at Maxwell Chambers\, Online over Zoom)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																\n															\n															\n				\n				\n				\n					\n			\n							\n								\n							\n						\n				\n					CategoryFee (SGD)				\n			\n					\n					\n				\n			YouTube Livestreaming TicketFreeZoom Webinar Ticket$30*		\n					\n		\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Speakers		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Dr Michael Hwang		\n				\n				\n				\n							Dr Michael Hwang S.C. currently practises as an international arbitrator based in Singapore with a selective practice as Senior Counsel of the Supreme Court of Singapore. He served as the Chief Justice of the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) Courts from 2010 – 2018.   Dr Hwang’s other past appointments include: Judicial Commissioner of the Supreme Court of Singapore; Singapore’s Non-Resident Ambassador to Switzerland and Argentina; President of the Law Society of Singapore; Commissioner of the United Nations Compensation Commission; Vice Chairman of the ICC International Court of Arbitration; Vice President of the International Council of Commercial Arbitration (ICCA); and a Visiting (and later Adjunct) Professor of the National University of Singapore. He was educated at undergraduate and postgraduate levels at Oxford University\, where he won the Gordon Warter Scholarship from Pembroke College by open competitive examination. He has been conferred an Honorary LLD by the University of Sydney. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Jessica Fei		\n				\n				\n				\n							Jessica is a widely recognized leading international arbitration and dispute resolution specialist with close to 30 years’ experience working with international arbitration institutions and leading firms.  Constantly ranked and recommended by leading legal media including Chambers\, WWL\, Legal 500\, and ALB\, Jessica is one of the very few leading international arbitration practitioners (acting as counsel and arbitrator)  with dual qualifications (China and New York) as well as extensive cross-border dispute resolution experience between Chinese/Asian and Western parties. Jessica focuses her practice on international arbitration\, litigation and alternative disputes resolution. She sits regularly as arbitrator in commercial arbitration cases\, and is listed on the international arbitrator panels of the SIAC\, HKIAC\, CIETAC\, ICDR/AAA\, AIAC\, KCAB\, CEAC etc. Jessica is a court member of SIAC Court of Arbitration\, a member of the International/ Asia Advisory Committee of the AAA/ICDR\, a member of the CEAC Advisory Board\, VP of the UIA Litigation Committee and China Chapter Chair of NYSBA International Section. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Sae Youn Kim		\n				\n				\n				\n							Sae Youn Kim is a partner of the International Arbitration & Cross-Border Litigation Practice of Kim & Chang. Ms. Kim practices primarily in the areas of international litigation and arbitration with an emphasis on commercial and international law. Before joining Kim & Chang\, she served as a judge at various Korean district courts\, and practiced as a key member in major Korean law firms. Ms. Kim also sits as an arbitrator. Her expertise in international dispute resolution has been recognized by the variety of roles she holds and held in various institutions\, including but not limited to a Commissioner of the Korea Trade Commission\, a Vice-Chair of the Arbitration Committee of the International Bar Association\, a Co-Chair of the Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Committee of the Inter-Pacific Bar Association\, and a member of the ICC Court. She is regularly selected as leading lawyer by publications such as Chambers and Partners\, Who’s Who Legal\, Legal 500\, and Asian Legal Business. Ms. Kim received an LL.M. from Duke University Law School in 2007\, and her LL.B. from Seoul National University College of Law in 1991. She graduated the Judicial Training and Research Institute by the Supreme Court of Korea in 1994. She speaks and practices in both Korean and English. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Vijayendra Pratap Singh		\n				\n				\n				\n							With over 20 years of experience\, Vijayendra Pratap Singh heads the Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice in Delhi. Vijayendra represents clients in international\, commercial and domestic arbitrations; corporate and commercial litigation; regulatory practices and securities law. He has advised various government departments\, such as the Department of Economic Affairs\, Ministry of Finance; Securities and Exchange Board of India; Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation; the Ministry of Consumer Affairs\, etc.\, on the de-criminalisation of various Statutes and has been involved in various policy making initiatives of the Government of India. Vijayendra’s expertise span domestic and international arbitration\, as well as disputes in various fora in India\, ranging from shareholder disputes to corporate actions. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Lawrence Teh (Moderator)		\n				\n				\n				\n							Lawrence Teh is the Global Co-Head of Dentons’ International Arbitration practice and a senior partner in Dentons Rodyk’s Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice group. He is Co-Head of Dentons Rodyk’s International Arbitration and Shipping practice groups. He has particular experience in handling commercial disputes including those of international trade and commodities\, maritime and aviation\, banking and financial services\, onshore and offshore construction\, mergers\, acquisitions\, joint ventures and other investments\, and insurance. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Attendance Policy		\n				\n				\n				\n							Participants who wish to obtain CPD Points are reminded that they must comply strictly with the Attendance Policy set out in the CPD Guidelines. For participants attending the face-to-face activity\, this includes signing in on arrival and signing out at the conclusion of the activity in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being absent from the activity for more than 15 minutes. For those participating via the webinar\, this includes logging in at the start of the webinar and logging out at the conclusion of the webinar in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being away from the activity for more than 15 minutes. Participants who do not comply with the Attendance Policy will not be able to obtain CPD Points for attending the activity. Please refer to https://www.silecpdcentre.sg for more information. Practice Area: Alternative Dispute Resolution Training Category: General 						\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Earn 1 Public CPD Point		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Terms & Conditions		\n				\n				\n				\n							1) Registration – Limited slots are available on a first-come-first-served basis. 2) Consent to data collection – You consent for Maxwell Chambers and their partners to collect\, use and disclose the personal data that you provide in this form for marketing purposes\, including adding you to their mailing list for industry updates. The Organiser reserves the right to cancel or alter the content and timing of the programme or the identity of the speakers. In the event that the webinar is cancelled by the Organiser\, the participants will be notified prior to the webinar. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Share		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n								\n						\n															\n																Share on facebook\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on twitter\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on linkedin\n							\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on whatsapp\n							\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/2026/03/05/10questionswithmaxwell-interview-series-min-kyung-kim-des-voeux-chambers/#new_tab
LOCATION:Singapore
CATEGORIES:Happenings by Maxwell Chambers
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/Min-Kyung-Kim-Pg-1.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20260326
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20260327
DTSTAMP:20260620T115845
CREATED:20260326T015310Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20260326T015310Z
UID:10000857-1774483200-1774569599@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:Maxwell En-Route: Jern-Fei Ng KC with Zhao Fang [Season 4\, Episode 3]
DESCRIPTION:Event Details		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Maxwell Conversations: Managing Public Policy | 29 August 2024		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n				\n				\n							Maxwell Conversations features leading personalities at the top of the international dispute resolution industry. These events seek to challenge assumptions with a deeper examination of the issues. Synposis  Public policy is an important element in determining the arbitrability of a dispute\, and also a ground on which an award may be annulled or refused enforcement. It has often been said that the public policy should be construed narrowly in keeping with the pro-arbitration policy of the New York Convention or the UNCITRAL Model Law. Held as part of Singapore Convention Week\, this session of Maxwell Conversations focused on the crucial role of public policy in international arbitration. The discussion highlighted how public policy influences the arbitrability of disputes and serves as grounds for annulling or refusing the enforcement of an award. While it is commonly understood that public policy should be interpreted narrowly\, aligning with the pro-arbitration stance of the New York Convention and UNCITRAL Model Law\, the event also shed light on less frequently discussed topics. The panel explored the importance of arbitrator independence and seat court review\, which are considered part of the “international public policy” of arbitration. This was contrasted with how courts may enforce annulled awards if they deem the annulment contrary to their own national public policy\, touching on issues like crime\, corruption\, or sovereignty. The discussion raised important questions about whether international and national public policies are opposing forces or if enforcing courts should consider multiple layers of public policy\, including the public policies of the governing law\, the seat of arbitration\, and how to navigate conflicts between these different frameworks. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n				\n				\n							The books referenced by Michael at the start of the session are: \n\nThe Public Policy Exception under the New York Convention\, Second Edition by Anton G. Maurer\nICCA’s Guide to the Interpretation of the 1958 New York Convention\, Second Edition\nGuide on the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards\, New York 1958 by the UNCITRAL Secretariat\n\nAdditional reference materials include: \n\nRe-calibration of curial intervention in public policy challenges against arbitral awards” written by Darius Chan and Elias Ngai of the Singapore Management University in the Journal of International Arbitration\n						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Q&A from the Lecture:		\n				\n				\n				\n							Q1: What are the potential challenges in the future for issuing arbitral awards? Are there any changes in environment or technology that may mitigate or worsen these challenges? \nQ2: What aspects of arbitration are ready for AI? \nQ3: What do you think are the key issues that need to be considered when using technology? \nQ4: About diversity\, I notice that the ICC now has an almost 50/50 male/female mix. Is this too fast and too artificial? \nQ5: For operating with ICC arbitration\, since the publishing of the ICC arbitration rules 2021 in the year of 2021\, which part of the arbitration rules 2021 would ICC suggest multi-national companies\, future expert witnesses\, future party representatives and future arbitrators to pay attention to as per ICC’s observation so far? \nQ6: What would ICC like expert witnesses\, party representatives\, and arbitrators to do (and prepare themselves) in order to operate ICC arbitration in line with ICC’s vision?  						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Watch the full recorded session below:		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										29 August 2024\, Thursday \n									\n								\n											\n													\n										8.00 am – 9:30 am (GMT+8)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										Singapore\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Organiser: Maxwell Chambers\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Format: Hybrid (In-person at Maxwell Chambers\, Online over Zoom)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																\n															\n															\n				\n				\n				\n					\n			\n							\n								\n							\n						\n				\n					CategoryFee (SGD)				\n			\n					\n					\n				\n			YouTube Livestreaming TicketFreeZoom Webinar Ticket$30*		\n					\n		\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Speakers		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Dr Michael Hwang		\n				\n				\n				\n							Dr Michael Hwang S.C. currently practises as an international arbitrator based in Singapore with a selective practice as Senior Counsel of the Supreme Court of Singapore. He served as the Chief Justice of the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) Courts from 2010 – 2018.   Dr Hwang’s other past appointments include: Judicial Commissioner of the Supreme Court of Singapore; Singapore’s Non-Resident Ambassador to Switzerland and Argentina; President of the Law Society of Singapore; Commissioner of the United Nations Compensation Commission; Vice Chairman of the ICC International Court of Arbitration; Vice President of the International Council of Commercial Arbitration (ICCA); and a Visiting (and later Adjunct) Professor of the National University of Singapore. He was educated at undergraduate and postgraduate levels at Oxford University\, where he won the Gordon Warter Scholarship from Pembroke College by open competitive examination. He has been conferred an Honorary LLD by the University of Sydney. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Jessica Fei		\n				\n				\n				\n							Jessica is a widely recognized leading international arbitration and dispute resolution specialist with close to 30 years’ experience working with international arbitration institutions and leading firms.  Constantly ranked and recommended by leading legal media including Chambers\, WWL\, Legal 500\, and ALB\, Jessica is one of the very few leading international arbitration practitioners (acting as counsel and arbitrator)  with dual qualifications (China and New York) as well as extensive cross-border dispute resolution experience between Chinese/Asian and Western parties. Jessica focuses her practice on international arbitration\, litigation and alternative disputes resolution. She sits regularly as arbitrator in commercial arbitration cases\, and is listed on the international arbitrator panels of the SIAC\, HKIAC\, CIETAC\, ICDR/AAA\, AIAC\, KCAB\, CEAC etc. Jessica is a court member of SIAC Court of Arbitration\, a member of the International/ Asia Advisory Committee of the AAA/ICDR\, a member of the CEAC Advisory Board\, VP of the UIA Litigation Committee and China Chapter Chair of NYSBA International Section. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Sae Youn Kim		\n				\n				\n				\n							Sae Youn Kim is a partner of the International Arbitration & Cross-Border Litigation Practice of Kim & Chang. Ms. Kim practices primarily in the areas of international litigation and arbitration with an emphasis on commercial and international law. Before joining Kim & Chang\, she served as a judge at various Korean district courts\, and practiced as a key member in major Korean law firms. Ms. Kim also sits as an arbitrator. Her expertise in international dispute resolution has been recognized by the variety of roles she holds and held in various institutions\, including but not limited to a Commissioner of the Korea Trade Commission\, a Vice-Chair of the Arbitration Committee of the International Bar Association\, a Co-Chair of the Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Committee of the Inter-Pacific Bar Association\, and a member of the ICC Court. She is regularly selected as leading lawyer by publications such as Chambers and Partners\, Who’s Who Legal\, Legal 500\, and Asian Legal Business. Ms. Kim received an LL.M. from Duke University Law School in 2007\, and her LL.B. from Seoul National University College of Law in 1991. She graduated the Judicial Training and Research Institute by the Supreme Court of Korea in 1994. She speaks and practices in both Korean and English. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Vijayendra Pratap Singh		\n				\n				\n				\n							With over 20 years of experience\, Vijayendra Pratap Singh heads the Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice in Delhi. Vijayendra represents clients in international\, commercial and domestic arbitrations; corporate and commercial litigation; regulatory practices and securities law. He has advised various government departments\, such as the Department of Economic Affairs\, Ministry of Finance; Securities and Exchange Board of India; Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation; the Ministry of Consumer Affairs\, etc.\, on the de-criminalisation of various Statutes and has been involved in various policy making initiatives of the Government of India. Vijayendra’s expertise span domestic and international arbitration\, as well as disputes in various fora in India\, ranging from shareholder disputes to corporate actions. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Lawrence Teh (Moderator)		\n				\n				\n				\n							Lawrence Teh is the Global Co-Head of Dentons’ International Arbitration practice and a senior partner in Dentons Rodyk’s Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice group. He is Co-Head of Dentons Rodyk’s International Arbitration and Shipping practice groups. He has particular experience in handling commercial disputes including those of international trade and commodities\, maritime and aviation\, banking and financial services\, onshore and offshore construction\, mergers\, acquisitions\, joint ventures and other investments\, and insurance. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Attendance Policy		\n				\n				\n				\n							Participants who wish to obtain CPD Points are reminded that they must comply strictly with the Attendance Policy set out in the CPD Guidelines. For participants attending the face-to-face activity\, this includes signing in on arrival and signing out at the conclusion of the activity in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being absent from the activity for more than 15 minutes. For those participating via the webinar\, this includes logging in at the start of the webinar and logging out at the conclusion of the webinar in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being away from the activity for more than 15 minutes. Participants who do not comply with the Attendance Policy will not be able to obtain CPD Points for attending the activity. Please refer to https://www.silecpdcentre.sg for more information. Practice Area: Alternative Dispute Resolution Training Category: General 						\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Earn 1 Public CPD Point		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Terms & Conditions		\n				\n				\n				\n							1) Registration – Limited slots are available on a first-come-first-served basis. 2) Consent to data collection – You consent for Maxwell Chambers and their partners to collect\, use and disclose the personal data that you provide in this form for marketing purposes\, including adding you to their mailing list for industry updates. The Organiser reserves the right to cancel or alter the content and timing of the programme or the identity of the speakers. In the event that the webinar is cancelled by the Organiser\, the participants will be notified prior to the webinar. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Share		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n								\n						\n															\n																Share on facebook\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on twitter\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on linkedin\n							\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on whatsapp\n							\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/maxwell-enroute/#new_tab
LOCATION:Singapore
CATEGORIES:Happenings by Maxwell Chambers
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/season-4-zhao-fang.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20260413
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20260414
DTSTAMP:20260620T115845
CREATED:20260413T015316Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20260413T015316Z
UID:10000885-1776038400-1776124799@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:10 Questions With Maxwell Interview Series: Hi-Taek Shin\, Twenty Essex Chambers
DESCRIPTION:Event Details		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Maxwell Conversations: Managing Public Policy | 29 August 2024		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n				\n				\n							Maxwell Conversations features leading personalities at the top of the international dispute resolution industry. These events seek to challenge assumptions with a deeper examination of the issues. Synposis  Public policy is an important element in determining the arbitrability of a dispute\, and also a ground on which an award may be annulled or refused enforcement. It has often been said that the public policy should be construed narrowly in keeping with the pro-arbitration policy of the New York Convention or the UNCITRAL Model Law. Held as part of Singapore Convention Week\, this session of Maxwell Conversations focused on the crucial role of public policy in international arbitration. The discussion highlighted how public policy influences the arbitrability of disputes and serves as grounds for annulling or refusing the enforcement of an award. While it is commonly understood that public policy should be interpreted narrowly\, aligning with the pro-arbitration stance of the New York Convention and UNCITRAL Model Law\, the event also shed light on less frequently discussed topics. The panel explored the importance of arbitrator independence and seat court review\, which are considered part of the “international public policy” of arbitration. This was contrasted with how courts may enforce annulled awards if they deem the annulment contrary to their own national public policy\, touching on issues like crime\, corruption\, or sovereignty. The discussion raised important questions about whether international and national public policies are opposing forces or if enforcing courts should consider multiple layers of public policy\, including the public policies of the governing law\, the seat of arbitration\, and how to navigate conflicts between these different frameworks. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n				\n				\n							The books referenced by Michael at the start of the session are: \n\nThe Public Policy Exception under the New York Convention\, Second Edition by Anton G. Maurer\nICCA’s Guide to the Interpretation of the 1958 New York Convention\, Second Edition\nGuide on the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards\, New York 1958 by the UNCITRAL Secretariat\n\nAdditional reference materials include: \n\nRe-calibration of curial intervention in public policy challenges against arbitral awards” written by Darius Chan and Elias Ngai of the Singapore Management University in the Journal of International Arbitration\n						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Q&A from the Lecture:		\n				\n				\n				\n							Q1: What are the potential challenges in the future for issuing arbitral awards? Are there any changes in environment or technology that may mitigate or worsen these challenges? \nQ2: What aspects of arbitration are ready for AI? \nQ3: What do you think are the key issues that need to be considered when using technology? \nQ4: About diversity\, I notice that the ICC now has an almost 50/50 male/female mix. Is this too fast and too artificial? \nQ5: For operating with ICC arbitration\, since the publishing of the ICC arbitration rules 2021 in the year of 2021\, which part of the arbitration rules 2021 would ICC suggest multi-national companies\, future expert witnesses\, future party representatives and future arbitrators to pay attention to as per ICC’s observation so far? \nQ6: What would ICC like expert witnesses\, party representatives\, and arbitrators to do (and prepare themselves) in order to operate ICC arbitration in line with ICC’s vision?  						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Watch the full recorded session below:		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										29 August 2024\, Thursday \n									\n								\n											\n													\n										8.00 am – 9:30 am (GMT+8)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										Singapore\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Organiser: Maxwell Chambers\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Format: Hybrid (In-person at Maxwell Chambers\, Online over Zoom)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																\n															\n															\n				\n				\n				\n					\n			\n							\n								\n							\n						\n				\n					CategoryFee (SGD)				\n			\n					\n					\n				\n			YouTube Livestreaming TicketFreeZoom Webinar Ticket$30*		\n					\n		\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Speakers		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Dr Michael Hwang		\n				\n				\n				\n							Dr Michael Hwang S.C. currently practises as an international arbitrator based in Singapore with a selective practice as Senior Counsel of the Supreme Court of Singapore. He served as the Chief Justice of the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) Courts from 2010 – 2018.   Dr Hwang’s other past appointments include: Judicial Commissioner of the Supreme Court of Singapore; Singapore’s Non-Resident Ambassador to Switzerland and Argentina; President of the Law Society of Singapore; Commissioner of the United Nations Compensation Commission; Vice Chairman of the ICC International Court of Arbitration; Vice President of the International Council of Commercial Arbitration (ICCA); and a Visiting (and later Adjunct) Professor of the National University of Singapore. He was educated at undergraduate and postgraduate levels at Oxford University\, where he won the Gordon Warter Scholarship from Pembroke College by open competitive examination. He has been conferred an Honorary LLD by the University of Sydney. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Jessica Fei		\n				\n				\n				\n							Jessica is a widely recognized leading international arbitration and dispute resolution specialist with close to 30 years’ experience working with international arbitration institutions and leading firms.  Constantly ranked and recommended by leading legal media including Chambers\, WWL\, Legal 500\, and ALB\, Jessica is one of the very few leading international arbitration practitioners (acting as counsel and arbitrator)  with dual qualifications (China and New York) as well as extensive cross-border dispute resolution experience between Chinese/Asian and Western parties. Jessica focuses her practice on international arbitration\, litigation and alternative disputes resolution. She sits regularly as arbitrator in commercial arbitration cases\, and is listed on the international arbitrator panels of the SIAC\, HKIAC\, CIETAC\, ICDR/AAA\, AIAC\, KCAB\, CEAC etc. Jessica is a court member of SIAC Court of Arbitration\, a member of the International/ Asia Advisory Committee of the AAA/ICDR\, a member of the CEAC Advisory Board\, VP of the UIA Litigation Committee and China Chapter Chair of NYSBA International Section. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Sae Youn Kim		\n				\n				\n				\n							Sae Youn Kim is a partner of the International Arbitration & Cross-Border Litigation Practice of Kim & Chang. Ms. Kim practices primarily in the areas of international litigation and arbitration with an emphasis on commercial and international law. Before joining Kim & Chang\, she served as a judge at various Korean district courts\, and practiced as a key member in major Korean law firms. Ms. Kim also sits as an arbitrator. Her expertise in international dispute resolution has been recognized by the variety of roles she holds and held in various institutions\, including but not limited to a Commissioner of the Korea Trade Commission\, a Vice-Chair of the Arbitration Committee of the International Bar Association\, a Co-Chair of the Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Committee of the Inter-Pacific Bar Association\, and a member of the ICC Court. She is regularly selected as leading lawyer by publications such as Chambers and Partners\, Who’s Who Legal\, Legal 500\, and Asian Legal Business. Ms. Kim received an LL.M. from Duke University Law School in 2007\, and her LL.B. from Seoul National University College of Law in 1991. She graduated the Judicial Training and Research Institute by the Supreme Court of Korea in 1994. She speaks and practices in both Korean and English. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Vijayendra Pratap Singh		\n				\n				\n				\n							With over 20 years of experience\, Vijayendra Pratap Singh heads the Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice in Delhi. Vijayendra represents clients in international\, commercial and domestic arbitrations; corporate and commercial litigation; regulatory practices and securities law. He has advised various government departments\, such as the Department of Economic Affairs\, Ministry of Finance; Securities and Exchange Board of India; Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation; the Ministry of Consumer Affairs\, etc.\, on the de-criminalisation of various Statutes and has been involved in various policy making initiatives of the Government of India. Vijayendra’s expertise span domestic and international arbitration\, as well as disputes in various fora in India\, ranging from shareholder disputes to corporate actions. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Lawrence Teh (Moderator)		\n				\n				\n				\n							Lawrence Teh is the Global Co-Head of Dentons’ International Arbitration practice and a senior partner in Dentons Rodyk’s Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice group. He is Co-Head of Dentons Rodyk’s International Arbitration and Shipping practice groups. He has particular experience in handling commercial disputes including those of international trade and commodities\, maritime and aviation\, banking and financial services\, onshore and offshore construction\, mergers\, acquisitions\, joint ventures and other investments\, and insurance. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Attendance Policy		\n				\n				\n				\n							Participants who wish to obtain CPD Points are reminded that they must comply strictly with the Attendance Policy set out in the CPD Guidelines. For participants attending the face-to-face activity\, this includes signing in on arrival and signing out at the conclusion of the activity in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being absent from the activity for more than 15 minutes. For those participating via the webinar\, this includes logging in at the start of the webinar and logging out at the conclusion of the webinar in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being away from the activity for more than 15 minutes. Participants who do not comply with the Attendance Policy will not be able to obtain CPD Points for attending the activity. Please refer to https://www.silecpdcentre.sg for more information. Practice Area: Alternative Dispute Resolution Training Category: General 						\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Earn 1 Public CPD Point		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Terms & Conditions		\n				\n				\n				\n							1) Registration – Limited slots are available on a first-come-first-served basis. 2) Consent to data collection – You consent for Maxwell Chambers and their partners to collect\, use and disclose the personal data that you provide in this form for marketing purposes\, including adding you to their mailing list for industry updates. The Organiser reserves the right to cancel or alter the content and timing of the programme or the identity of the speakers. In the event that the webinar is cancelled by the Organiser\, the participants will be notified prior to the webinar. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Share		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n								\n						\n															\n																Share on facebook\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on twitter\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on linkedin\n							\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on whatsapp\n							\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/2026/04/13/10questionswithmaxwell-interview-series-hi-taek-shin-twenty-essex-chambers/#new_tab
LOCATION:Singapore
CATEGORIES:Happenings by Maxwell Chambers
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Hi-Taek-Shin-Pg-1.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Singapore:20260420T080000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Singapore:20260520T180000
DTSTAMP:20260620T115845
CREATED:20260417T024515Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20260420T033307Z
UID:10000886-1776672000-1779300000@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:Beyond Use\, Not Beyond Value: E-Waste Recycling Drive 2026
DESCRIPTION:Event Details		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Maxwell Conversations: Managing Public Policy | 29 August 2024		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n				\n				\n							Maxwell Conversations features leading personalities at the top of the international dispute resolution industry. These events seek to challenge assumptions with a deeper examination of the issues. Synposis  Public policy is an important element in determining the arbitrability of a dispute\, and also a ground on which an award may be annulled or refused enforcement. It has often been said that the public policy should be construed narrowly in keeping with the pro-arbitration policy of the New York Convention or the UNCITRAL Model Law. Held as part of Singapore Convention Week\, this session of Maxwell Conversations focused on the crucial role of public policy in international arbitration. The discussion highlighted how public policy influences the arbitrability of disputes and serves as grounds for annulling or refusing the enforcement of an award. While it is commonly understood that public policy should be interpreted narrowly\, aligning with the pro-arbitration stance of the New York Convention and UNCITRAL Model Law\, the event also shed light on less frequently discussed topics. The panel explored the importance of arbitrator independence and seat court review\, which are considered part of the “international public policy” of arbitration. This was contrasted with how courts may enforce annulled awards if they deem the annulment contrary to their own national public policy\, touching on issues like crime\, corruption\, or sovereignty. The discussion raised important questions about whether international and national public policies are opposing forces or if enforcing courts should consider multiple layers of public policy\, including the public policies of the governing law\, the seat of arbitration\, and how to navigate conflicts between these different frameworks. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n				\n				\n							The books referenced by Michael at the start of the session are: \n\nThe Public Policy Exception under the New York Convention\, Second Edition by Anton G. Maurer\nICCA’s Guide to the Interpretation of the 1958 New York Convention\, Second Edition\nGuide on the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards\, New York 1958 by the UNCITRAL Secretariat\n\nAdditional reference materials include: \n\nRe-calibration of curial intervention in public policy challenges against arbitral awards” written by Darius Chan and Elias Ngai of the Singapore Management University in the Journal of International Arbitration\n						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Q&A from the Lecture:		\n				\n				\n				\n							Q1: What are the potential challenges in the future for issuing arbitral awards? Are there any changes in environment or technology that may mitigate or worsen these challenges? \nQ2: What aspects of arbitration are ready for AI? \nQ3: What do you think are the key issues that need to be considered when using technology? \nQ4: About diversity\, I notice that the ICC now has an almost 50/50 male/female mix. Is this too fast and too artificial? \nQ5: For operating with ICC arbitration\, since the publishing of the ICC arbitration rules 2021 in the year of 2021\, which part of the arbitration rules 2021 would ICC suggest multi-national companies\, future expert witnesses\, future party representatives and future arbitrators to pay attention to as per ICC’s observation so far? \nQ6: What would ICC like expert witnesses\, party representatives\, and arbitrators to do (and prepare themselves) in order to operate ICC arbitration in line with ICC’s vision?  						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Watch the full recorded session below:		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										29 August 2024\, Thursday \n									\n								\n											\n													\n										8.00 am – 9:30 am (GMT+8)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										Singapore\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Organiser: Maxwell Chambers\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Format: Hybrid (In-person at Maxwell Chambers\, Online over Zoom)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																\n															\n															\n				\n				\n				\n					\n			\n							\n								\n							\n						\n				\n					CategoryFee (SGD)				\n			\n					\n					\n				\n			YouTube Livestreaming TicketFreeZoom Webinar Ticket$30*		\n					\n		\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Speakers		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Dr Michael Hwang		\n				\n				\n				\n							Dr Michael Hwang S.C. currently practises as an international arbitrator based in Singapore with a selective practice as Senior Counsel of the Supreme Court of Singapore. He served as the Chief Justice of the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) Courts from 2010 – 2018.   Dr Hwang’s other past appointments include: Judicial Commissioner of the Supreme Court of Singapore; Singapore’s Non-Resident Ambassador to Switzerland and Argentina; President of the Law Society of Singapore; Commissioner of the United Nations Compensation Commission; Vice Chairman of the ICC International Court of Arbitration; Vice President of the International Council of Commercial Arbitration (ICCA); and a Visiting (and later Adjunct) Professor of the National University of Singapore. He was educated at undergraduate and postgraduate levels at Oxford University\, where he won the Gordon Warter Scholarship from Pembroke College by open competitive examination. He has been conferred an Honorary LLD by the University of Sydney. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Jessica Fei		\n				\n				\n				\n							Jessica is a widely recognized leading international arbitration and dispute resolution specialist with close to 30 years’ experience working with international arbitration institutions and leading firms.  Constantly ranked and recommended by leading legal media including Chambers\, WWL\, Legal 500\, and ALB\, Jessica is one of the very few leading international arbitration practitioners (acting as counsel and arbitrator)  with dual qualifications (China and New York) as well as extensive cross-border dispute resolution experience between Chinese/Asian and Western parties. Jessica focuses her practice on international arbitration\, litigation and alternative disputes resolution. She sits regularly as arbitrator in commercial arbitration cases\, and is listed on the international arbitrator panels of the SIAC\, HKIAC\, CIETAC\, ICDR/AAA\, AIAC\, KCAB\, CEAC etc. Jessica is a court member of SIAC Court of Arbitration\, a member of the International/ Asia Advisory Committee of the AAA/ICDR\, a member of the CEAC Advisory Board\, VP of the UIA Litigation Committee and China Chapter Chair of NYSBA International Section. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Sae Youn Kim		\n				\n				\n				\n							Sae Youn Kim is a partner of the International Arbitration & Cross-Border Litigation Practice of Kim & Chang. Ms. Kim practices primarily in the areas of international litigation and arbitration with an emphasis on commercial and international law. Before joining Kim & Chang\, she served as a judge at various Korean district courts\, and practiced as a key member in major Korean law firms. Ms. Kim also sits as an arbitrator. Her expertise in international dispute resolution has been recognized by the variety of roles she holds and held in various institutions\, including but not limited to a Commissioner of the Korea Trade Commission\, a Vice-Chair of the Arbitration Committee of the International Bar Association\, a Co-Chair of the Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Committee of the Inter-Pacific Bar Association\, and a member of the ICC Court. She is regularly selected as leading lawyer by publications such as Chambers and Partners\, Who’s Who Legal\, Legal 500\, and Asian Legal Business. Ms. Kim received an LL.M. from Duke University Law School in 2007\, and her LL.B. from Seoul National University College of Law in 1991. She graduated the Judicial Training and Research Institute by the Supreme Court of Korea in 1994. She speaks and practices in both Korean and English. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Vijayendra Pratap Singh		\n				\n				\n				\n							With over 20 years of experience\, Vijayendra Pratap Singh heads the Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice in Delhi. Vijayendra represents clients in international\, commercial and domestic arbitrations; corporate and commercial litigation; regulatory practices and securities law. He has advised various government departments\, such as the Department of Economic Affairs\, Ministry of Finance; Securities and Exchange Board of India; Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation; the Ministry of Consumer Affairs\, etc.\, on the de-criminalisation of various Statutes and has been involved in various policy making initiatives of the Government of India. Vijayendra’s expertise span domestic and international arbitration\, as well as disputes in various fora in India\, ranging from shareholder disputes to corporate actions. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Lawrence Teh (Moderator)		\n				\n				\n				\n							Lawrence Teh is the Global Co-Head of Dentons’ International Arbitration practice and a senior partner in Dentons Rodyk’s Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice group. He is Co-Head of Dentons Rodyk’s International Arbitration and Shipping practice groups. He has particular experience in handling commercial disputes including those of international trade and commodities\, maritime and aviation\, banking and financial services\, onshore and offshore construction\, mergers\, acquisitions\, joint ventures and other investments\, and insurance. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Attendance Policy		\n				\n				\n				\n							Participants who wish to obtain CPD Points are reminded that they must comply strictly with the Attendance Policy set out in the CPD Guidelines. For participants attending the face-to-face activity\, this includes signing in on arrival and signing out at the conclusion of the activity in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being absent from the activity for more than 15 minutes. For those participating via the webinar\, this includes logging in at the start of the webinar and logging out at the conclusion of the webinar in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being away from the activity for more than 15 minutes. Participants who do not comply with the Attendance Policy will not be able to obtain CPD Points for attending the activity. Please refer to https://www.silecpdcentre.sg for more information. Practice Area: Alternative Dispute Resolution Training Category: General 						\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Earn 1 Public CPD Point		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Terms & Conditions		\n				\n				\n				\n							1) Registration – Limited slots are available on a first-come-first-served basis. 2) Consent to data collection – You consent for Maxwell Chambers and their partners to collect\, use and disclose the personal data that you provide in this form for marketing purposes\, including adding you to their mailing list for industry updates. The Organiser reserves the right to cancel or alter the content and timing of the programme or the identity of the speakers. In the event that the webinar is cancelled by the Organiser\, the participants will be notified prior to the webinar. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Share		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n								\n						\n															\n																Share on facebook\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on twitter\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on linkedin\n							\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on whatsapp\n							\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/event/maxwell-chambers-e-waste-recycling-drive-2026/
LOCATION:Singapore
CATEGORIES:Happenings by Maxwell Chambers
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/E-Waste-recycling-drive-horizontal.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Paris:20260428T140000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Paris:20260428T180000
DTSTAMP:20260620T115846
CREATED:20260422T042751Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20260422T042751Z
UID:10000890-1777384800-1777399200@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:Gallery Closure: Artwork Installation
DESCRIPTION:Event Details		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Maxwell Conversations: Managing Public Policy | 29 August 2024		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n				\n				\n							Maxwell Conversations features leading personalities at the top of the international dispute resolution industry. These events seek to challenge assumptions with a deeper examination of the issues. Synposis  Public policy is an important element in determining the arbitrability of a dispute\, and also a ground on which an award may be annulled or refused enforcement. It has often been said that the public policy should be construed narrowly in keeping with the pro-arbitration policy of the New York Convention or the UNCITRAL Model Law. Held as part of Singapore Convention Week\, this session of Maxwell Conversations focused on the crucial role of public policy in international arbitration. The discussion highlighted how public policy influences the arbitrability of disputes and serves as grounds for annulling or refusing the enforcement of an award. While it is commonly understood that public policy should be interpreted narrowly\, aligning with the pro-arbitration stance of the New York Convention and UNCITRAL Model Law\, the event also shed light on less frequently discussed topics. The panel explored the importance of arbitrator independence and seat court review\, which are considered part of the “international public policy” of arbitration. This was contrasted with how courts may enforce annulled awards if they deem the annulment contrary to their own national public policy\, touching on issues like crime\, corruption\, or sovereignty. The discussion raised important questions about whether international and national public policies are opposing forces or if enforcing courts should consider multiple layers of public policy\, including the public policies of the governing law\, the seat of arbitration\, and how to navigate conflicts between these different frameworks. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n				\n				\n							The books referenced by Michael at the start of the session are: \n\nThe Public Policy Exception under the New York Convention\, Second Edition by Anton G. Maurer\nICCA’s Guide to the Interpretation of the 1958 New York Convention\, Second Edition\nGuide on the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards\, New York 1958 by the UNCITRAL Secretariat\n\nAdditional reference materials include: \n\nRe-calibration of curial intervention in public policy challenges against arbitral awards” written by Darius Chan and Elias Ngai of the Singapore Management University in the Journal of International Arbitration\n						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Q&A from the Lecture:		\n				\n				\n				\n							Q1: What are the potential challenges in the future for issuing arbitral awards? Are there any changes in environment or technology that may mitigate or worsen these challenges? \nQ2: What aspects of arbitration are ready for AI? \nQ3: What do you think are the key issues that need to be considered when using technology? \nQ4: About diversity\, I notice that the ICC now has an almost 50/50 male/female mix. Is this too fast and too artificial? \nQ5: For operating with ICC arbitration\, since the publishing of the ICC arbitration rules 2021 in the year of 2021\, which part of the arbitration rules 2021 would ICC suggest multi-national companies\, future expert witnesses\, future party representatives and future arbitrators to pay attention to as per ICC’s observation so far? \nQ6: What would ICC like expert witnesses\, party representatives\, and arbitrators to do (and prepare themselves) in order to operate ICC arbitration in line with ICC’s vision?  						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Watch the full recorded session below:		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										29 August 2024\, Thursday \n									\n								\n											\n													\n										8.00 am – 9:30 am (GMT+8)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										Singapore\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Organiser: Maxwell Chambers\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Format: Hybrid (In-person at Maxwell Chambers\, Online over Zoom)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																\n															\n															\n				\n				\n				\n					\n			\n							\n								\n							\n						\n				\n					CategoryFee (SGD)				\n			\n					\n					\n				\n			YouTube Livestreaming TicketFreeZoom Webinar Ticket$30*		\n					\n		\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Speakers		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Dr Michael Hwang		\n				\n				\n				\n							Dr Michael Hwang S.C. currently practises as an international arbitrator based in Singapore with a selective practice as Senior Counsel of the Supreme Court of Singapore. He served as the Chief Justice of the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) Courts from 2010 – 2018.   Dr Hwang’s other past appointments include: Judicial Commissioner of the Supreme Court of Singapore; Singapore’s Non-Resident Ambassador to Switzerland and Argentina; President of the Law Society of Singapore; Commissioner of the United Nations Compensation Commission; Vice Chairman of the ICC International Court of Arbitration; Vice President of the International Council of Commercial Arbitration (ICCA); and a Visiting (and later Adjunct) Professor of the National University of Singapore. He was educated at undergraduate and postgraduate levels at Oxford University\, where he won the Gordon Warter Scholarship from Pembroke College by open competitive examination. He has been conferred an Honorary LLD by the University of Sydney. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Jessica Fei		\n				\n				\n				\n							Jessica is a widely recognized leading international arbitration and dispute resolution specialist with close to 30 years’ experience working with international arbitration institutions and leading firms.  Constantly ranked and recommended by leading legal media including Chambers\, WWL\, Legal 500\, and ALB\, Jessica is one of the very few leading international arbitration practitioners (acting as counsel and arbitrator)  with dual qualifications (China and New York) as well as extensive cross-border dispute resolution experience between Chinese/Asian and Western parties. Jessica focuses her practice on international arbitration\, litigation and alternative disputes resolution. She sits regularly as arbitrator in commercial arbitration cases\, and is listed on the international arbitrator panels of the SIAC\, HKIAC\, CIETAC\, ICDR/AAA\, AIAC\, KCAB\, CEAC etc. Jessica is a court member of SIAC Court of Arbitration\, a member of the International/ Asia Advisory Committee of the AAA/ICDR\, a member of the CEAC Advisory Board\, VP of the UIA Litigation Committee and China Chapter Chair of NYSBA International Section. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Sae Youn Kim		\n				\n				\n				\n							Sae Youn Kim is a partner of the International Arbitration & Cross-Border Litigation Practice of Kim & Chang. Ms. Kim practices primarily in the areas of international litigation and arbitration with an emphasis on commercial and international law. Before joining Kim & Chang\, she served as a judge at various Korean district courts\, and practiced as a key member in major Korean law firms. Ms. Kim also sits as an arbitrator. Her expertise in international dispute resolution has been recognized by the variety of roles she holds and held in various institutions\, including but not limited to a Commissioner of the Korea Trade Commission\, a Vice-Chair of the Arbitration Committee of the International Bar Association\, a Co-Chair of the Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Committee of the Inter-Pacific Bar Association\, and a member of the ICC Court. She is regularly selected as leading lawyer by publications such as Chambers and Partners\, Who’s Who Legal\, Legal 500\, and Asian Legal Business. Ms. Kim received an LL.M. from Duke University Law School in 2007\, and her LL.B. from Seoul National University College of Law in 1991. She graduated the Judicial Training and Research Institute by the Supreme Court of Korea in 1994. She speaks and practices in both Korean and English. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Vijayendra Pratap Singh		\n				\n				\n				\n							With over 20 years of experience\, Vijayendra Pratap Singh heads the Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice in Delhi. Vijayendra represents clients in international\, commercial and domestic arbitrations; corporate and commercial litigation; regulatory practices and securities law. He has advised various government departments\, such as the Department of Economic Affairs\, Ministry of Finance; Securities and Exchange Board of India; Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation; the Ministry of Consumer Affairs\, etc.\, on the de-criminalisation of various Statutes and has been involved in various policy making initiatives of the Government of India. Vijayendra’s expertise span domestic and international arbitration\, as well as disputes in various fora in India\, ranging from shareholder disputes to corporate actions. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Lawrence Teh (Moderator)		\n				\n				\n				\n							Lawrence Teh is the Global Co-Head of Dentons’ International Arbitration practice and a senior partner in Dentons Rodyk’s Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice group. He is Co-Head of Dentons Rodyk’s International Arbitration and Shipping practice groups. He has particular experience in handling commercial disputes including those of international trade and commodities\, maritime and aviation\, banking and financial services\, onshore and offshore construction\, mergers\, acquisitions\, joint ventures and other investments\, and insurance. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Attendance Policy		\n				\n				\n				\n							Participants who wish to obtain CPD Points are reminded that they must comply strictly with the Attendance Policy set out in the CPD Guidelines. For participants attending the face-to-face activity\, this includes signing in on arrival and signing out at the conclusion of the activity in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being absent from the activity for more than 15 minutes. For those participating via the webinar\, this includes logging in at the start of the webinar and logging out at the conclusion of the webinar in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being away from the activity for more than 15 minutes. Participants who do not comply with the Attendance Policy will not be able to obtain CPD Points for attending the activity. Please refer to https://www.silecpdcentre.sg for more information. Practice Area: Alternative Dispute Resolution Training Category: General 						\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Earn 1 Public CPD Point		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Terms & Conditions		\n				\n				\n				\n							1) Registration – Limited slots are available on a first-come-first-served basis. 2) Consent to data collection – You consent for Maxwell Chambers and their partners to collect\, use and disclose the personal data that you provide in this form for marketing purposes\, including adding you to their mailing list for industry updates. The Organiser reserves the right to cancel or alter the content and timing of the programme or the identity of the speakers. In the event that the webinar is cancelled by the Organiser\, the participants will be notified prior to the webinar. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Share		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n								\n						\n															\n																Share on facebook\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on twitter\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on linkedin\n							\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on whatsapp\n							\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/event/gallery-closure-artwork-installation/
LOCATION:Singapore
CATEGORIES:Happenings by Maxwell Chambers
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20260528
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20260529
DTSTAMP:20260620T115846
CREATED:20260528T080926Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20260528T080926Z
UID:10000918-1779926400-1780012799@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:10 Questions With Maxwell Interview Series: Mohammed Reza\, Withers KhattarWong
DESCRIPTION:Event Details		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Maxwell Conversations: Managing Public Policy | 29 August 2024		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n				\n				\n							Maxwell Conversations features leading personalities at the top of the international dispute resolution industry. These events seek to challenge assumptions with a deeper examination of the issues. Synposis  Public policy is an important element in determining the arbitrability of a dispute\, and also a ground on which an award may be annulled or refused enforcement. It has often been said that the public policy should be construed narrowly in keeping with the pro-arbitration policy of the New York Convention or the UNCITRAL Model Law. Held as part of Singapore Convention Week\, this session of Maxwell Conversations focused on the crucial role of public policy in international arbitration. The discussion highlighted how public policy influences the arbitrability of disputes and serves as grounds for annulling or refusing the enforcement of an award. While it is commonly understood that public policy should be interpreted narrowly\, aligning with the pro-arbitration stance of the New York Convention and UNCITRAL Model Law\, the event also shed light on less frequently discussed topics. The panel explored the importance of arbitrator independence and seat court review\, which are considered part of the “international public policy” of arbitration. This was contrasted with how courts may enforce annulled awards if they deem the annulment contrary to their own national public policy\, touching on issues like crime\, corruption\, or sovereignty. The discussion raised important questions about whether international and national public policies are opposing forces or if enforcing courts should consider multiple layers of public policy\, including the public policies of the governing law\, the seat of arbitration\, and how to navigate conflicts between these different frameworks. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n				\n				\n							The books referenced by Michael at the start of the session are: \n\nThe Public Policy Exception under the New York Convention\, Second Edition by Anton G. Maurer\nICCA’s Guide to the Interpretation of the 1958 New York Convention\, Second Edition\nGuide on the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards\, New York 1958 by the UNCITRAL Secretariat\n\nAdditional reference materials include: \n\nRe-calibration of curial intervention in public policy challenges against arbitral awards” written by Darius Chan and Elias Ngai of the Singapore Management University in the Journal of International Arbitration\n						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Q&A from the Lecture:		\n				\n				\n				\n							Q1: What are the potential challenges in the future for issuing arbitral awards? Are there any changes in environment or technology that may mitigate or worsen these challenges? \nQ2: What aspects of arbitration are ready for AI? \nQ3: What do you think are the key issues that need to be considered when using technology? \nQ4: About diversity\, I notice that the ICC now has an almost 50/50 male/female mix. Is this too fast and too artificial? \nQ5: For operating with ICC arbitration\, since the publishing of the ICC arbitration rules 2021 in the year of 2021\, which part of the arbitration rules 2021 would ICC suggest multi-national companies\, future expert witnesses\, future party representatives and future arbitrators to pay attention to as per ICC’s observation so far? \nQ6: What would ICC like expert witnesses\, party representatives\, and arbitrators to do (and prepare themselves) in order to operate ICC arbitration in line with ICC’s vision?  						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Watch the full recorded session below:		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										29 August 2024\, Thursday \n									\n								\n											\n													\n										8.00 am – 9:30 am (GMT+8)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										Singapore\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Organiser: Maxwell Chambers\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Format: Hybrid (In-person at Maxwell Chambers\, Online over Zoom)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																\n															\n															\n				\n				\n				\n					\n			\n							\n								\n							\n						\n				\n					CategoryFee (SGD)				\n			\n					\n					\n				\n			YouTube Livestreaming TicketFreeZoom Webinar Ticket$30*		\n					\n		\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Speakers		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Dr Michael Hwang		\n				\n				\n				\n							Dr Michael Hwang S.C. currently practises as an international arbitrator based in Singapore with a selective practice as Senior Counsel of the Supreme Court of Singapore. He served as the Chief Justice of the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) Courts from 2010 – 2018.   Dr Hwang’s other past appointments include: Judicial Commissioner of the Supreme Court of Singapore; Singapore’s Non-Resident Ambassador to Switzerland and Argentina; President of the Law Society of Singapore; Commissioner of the United Nations Compensation Commission; Vice Chairman of the ICC International Court of Arbitration; Vice President of the International Council of Commercial Arbitration (ICCA); and a Visiting (and later Adjunct) Professor of the National University of Singapore. He was educated at undergraduate and postgraduate levels at Oxford University\, where he won the Gordon Warter Scholarship from Pembroke College by open competitive examination. He has been conferred an Honorary LLD by the University of Sydney. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Jessica Fei		\n				\n				\n				\n							Jessica is a widely recognized leading international arbitration and dispute resolution specialist with close to 30 years’ experience working with international arbitration institutions and leading firms.  Constantly ranked and recommended by leading legal media including Chambers\, WWL\, Legal 500\, and ALB\, Jessica is one of the very few leading international arbitration practitioners (acting as counsel and arbitrator)  with dual qualifications (China and New York) as well as extensive cross-border dispute resolution experience between Chinese/Asian and Western parties. Jessica focuses her practice on international arbitration\, litigation and alternative disputes resolution. She sits regularly as arbitrator in commercial arbitration cases\, and is listed on the international arbitrator panels of the SIAC\, HKIAC\, CIETAC\, ICDR/AAA\, AIAC\, KCAB\, CEAC etc. Jessica is a court member of SIAC Court of Arbitration\, a member of the International/ Asia Advisory Committee of the AAA/ICDR\, a member of the CEAC Advisory Board\, VP of the UIA Litigation Committee and China Chapter Chair of NYSBA International Section. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Sae Youn Kim		\n				\n				\n				\n							Sae Youn Kim is a partner of the International Arbitration & Cross-Border Litigation Practice of Kim & Chang. Ms. Kim practices primarily in the areas of international litigation and arbitration with an emphasis on commercial and international law. Before joining Kim & Chang\, she served as a judge at various Korean district courts\, and practiced as a key member in major Korean law firms. Ms. Kim also sits as an arbitrator. Her expertise in international dispute resolution has been recognized by the variety of roles she holds and held in various institutions\, including but not limited to a Commissioner of the Korea Trade Commission\, a Vice-Chair of the Arbitration Committee of the International Bar Association\, a Co-Chair of the Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Committee of the Inter-Pacific Bar Association\, and a member of the ICC Court. She is regularly selected as leading lawyer by publications such as Chambers and Partners\, Who’s Who Legal\, Legal 500\, and Asian Legal Business. Ms. Kim received an LL.M. from Duke University Law School in 2007\, and her LL.B. from Seoul National University College of Law in 1991. She graduated the Judicial Training and Research Institute by the Supreme Court of Korea in 1994. She speaks and practices in both Korean and English. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Vijayendra Pratap Singh		\n				\n				\n				\n							With over 20 years of experience\, Vijayendra Pratap Singh heads the Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice in Delhi. Vijayendra represents clients in international\, commercial and domestic arbitrations; corporate and commercial litigation; regulatory practices and securities law. He has advised various government departments\, such as the Department of Economic Affairs\, Ministry of Finance; Securities and Exchange Board of India; Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation; the Ministry of Consumer Affairs\, etc.\, on the de-criminalisation of various Statutes and has been involved in various policy making initiatives of the Government of India. Vijayendra’s expertise span domestic and international arbitration\, as well as disputes in various fora in India\, ranging from shareholder disputes to corporate actions. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Lawrence Teh (Moderator)		\n				\n				\n				\n							Lawrence Teh is the Global Co-Head of Dentons’ International Arbitration practice and a senior partner in Dentons Rodyk’s Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice group. He is Co-Head of Dentons Rodyk’s International Arbitration and Shipping practice groups. He has particular experience in handling commercial disputes including those of international trade and commodities\, maritime and aviation\, banking and financial services\, onshore and offshore construction\, mergers\, acquisitions\, joint ventures and other investments\, and insurance. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Attendance Policy		\n				\n				\n				\n							Participants who wish to obtain CPD Points are reminded that they must comply strictly with the Attendance Policy set out in the CPD Guidelines. For participants attending the face-to-face activity\, this includes signing in on arrival and signing out at the conclusion of the activity in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being absent from the activity for more than 15 minutes. For those participating via the webinar\, this includes logging in at the start of the webinar and logging out at the conclusion of the webinar in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being away from the activity for more than 15 minutes. Participants who do not comply with the Attendance Policy will not be able to obtain CPD Points for attending the activity. Please refer to https://www.silecpdcentre.sg for more information. Practice Area: Alternative Dispute Resolution Training Category: General 						\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Earn 1 Public CPD Point		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Terms & Conditions		\n				\n				\n				\n							1) Registration – Limited slots are available on a first-come-first-served basis. 2) Consent to data collection – You consent for Maxwell Chambers and their partners to collect\, use and disclose the personal data that you provide in this form for marketing purposes\, including adding you to their mailing list for industry updates. The Organiser reserves the right to cancel or alter the content and timing of the programme or the identity of the speakers. In the event that the webinar is cancelled by the Organiser\, the participants will be notified prior to the webinar. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Share		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n								\n						\n															\n																Share on facebook\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on twitter\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on linkedin\n							\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on whatsapp\n							\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/2026/05/28/10questionswithmaxwell-interview-series-mohammed-reza-withers-khattarwong/#new_tab
LOCATION:Singapore
CATEGORIES:Happenings by Maxwell Chambers
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Mohammed-Reza-Pg-1-1.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Singapore:20260619T000000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Singapore:20260619T235900
DTSTAMP:20260620T115846
CREATED:20260619T083104Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20260619T083306Z
UID:10000937-1781827200-1781913540@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:[Maxwell Challenge] Interview Series: Mugeni Siwale Mulenga\, Former Judge of the Constitutional Court
DESCRIPTION:Event Details		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Maxwell Conversations: Managing Public Policy | 29 August 2024		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n				\n				\n							Maxwell Conversations features leading personalities at the top of the international dispute resolution industry. These events seek to challenge assumptions with a deeper examination of the issues. Synposis  Public policy is an important element in determining the arbitrability of a dispute\, and also a ground on which an award may be annulled or refused enforcement. It has often been said that the public policy should be construed narrowly in keeping with the pro-arbitration policy of the New York Convention or the UNCITRAL Model Law. Held as part of Singapore Convention Week\, this session of Maxwell Conversations focused on the crucial role of public policy in international arbitration. The discussion highlighted how public policy influences the arbitrability of disputes and serves as grounds for annulling or refusing the enforcement of an award. While it is commonly understood that public policy should be interpreted narrowly\, aligning with the pro-arbitration stance of the New York Convention and UNCITRAL Model Law\, the event also shed light on less frequently discussed topics. The panel explored the importance of arbitrator independence and seat court review\, which are considered part of the “international public policy” of arbitration. This was contrasted with how courts may enforce annulled awards if they deem the annulment contrary to their own national public policy\, touching on issues like crime\, corruption\, or sovereignty. The discussion raised important questions about whether international and national public policies are opposing forces or if enforcing courts should consider multiple layers of public policy\, including the public policies of the governing law\, the seat of arbitration\, and how to navigate conflicts between these different frameworks. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n				\n				\n							The books referenced by Michael at the start of the session are: \n\nThe Public Policy Exception under the New York Convention\, Second Edition by Anton G. Maurer\nICCA’s Guide to the Interpretation of the 1958 New York Convention\, Second Edition\nGuide on the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards\, New York 1958 by the UNCITRAL Secretariat\n\nAdditional reference materials include: \n\nRe-calibration of curial intervention in public policy challenges against arbitral awards” written by Darius Chan and Elias Ngai of the Singapore Management University in the Journal of International Arbitration\n						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Q&A from the Lecture:		\n				\n				\n				\n							Q1: What are the potential challenges in the future for issuing arbitral awards? Are there any changes in environment or technology that may mitigate or worsen these challenges? \nQ2: What aspects of arbitration are ready for AI? \nQ3: What do you think are the key issues that need to be considered when using technology? \nQ4: About diversity\, I notice that the ICC now has an almost 50/50 male/female mix. Is this too fast and too artificial? \nQ5: For operating with ICC arbitration\, since the publishing of the ICC arbitration rules 2021 in the year of 2021\, which part of the arbitration rules 2021 would ICC suggest multi-national companies\, future expert witnesses\, future party representatives and future arbitrators to pay attention to as per ICC’s observation so far? \nQ6: What would ICC like expert witnesses\, party representatives\, and arbitrators to do (and prepare themselves) in order to operate ICC arbitration in line with ICC’s vision?  						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Watch the full recorded session below:		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										29 August 2024\, Thursday \n									\n								\n											\n													\n										8.00 am – 9:30 am (GMT+8)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										Singapore\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Organiser: Maxwell Chambers\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Format: Hybrid (In-person at Maxwell Chambers\, Online over Zoom)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																\n															\n															\n				\n				\n				\n					\n			\n							\n								\n							\n						\n				\n					CategoryFee (SGD)				\n			\n					\n					\n				\n			YouTube Livestreaming TicketFreeZoom Webinar Ticket$30*		\n					\n		\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Speakers		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Dr Michael Hwang		\n				\n				\n				\n							Dr Michael Hwang S.C. currently practises as an international arbitrator based in Singapore with a selective practice as Senior Counsel of the Supreme Court of Singapore. He served as the Chief Justice of the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) Courts from 2010 – 2018.   Dr Hwang’s other past appointments include: Judicial Commissioner of the Supreme Court of Singapore; Singapore’s Non-Resident Ambassador to Switzerland and Argentina; President of the Law Society of Singapore; Commissioner of the United Nations Compensation Commission; Vice Chairman of the ICC International Court of Arbitration; Vice President of the International Council of Commercial Arbitration (ICCA); and a Visiting (and later Adjunct) Professor of the National University of Singapore. He was educated at undergraduate and postgraduate levels at Oxford University\, where he won the Gordon Warter Scholarship from Pembroke College by open competitive examination. He has been conferred an Honorary LLD by the University of Sydney. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Jessica Fei		\n				\n				\n				\n							Jessica is a widely recognized leading international arbitration and dispute resolution specialist with close to 30 years’ experience working with international arbitration institutions and leading firms.  Constantly ranked and recommended by leading legal media including Chambers\, WWL\, Legal 500\, and ALB\, Jessica is one of the very few leading international arbitration practitioners (acting as counsel and arbitrator)  with dual qualifications (China and New York) as well as extensive cross-border dispute resolution experience between Chinese/Asian and Western parties. Jessica focuses her practice on international arbitration\, litigation and alternative disputes resolution. She sits regularly as arbitrator in commercial arbitration cases\, and is listed on the international arbitrator panels of the SIAC\, HKIAC\, CIETAC\, ICDR/AAA\, AIAC\, KCAB\, CEAC etc. Jessica is a court member of SIAC Court of Arbitration\, a member of the International/ Asia Advisory Committee of the AAA/ICDR\, a member of the CEAC Advisory Board\, VP of the UIA Litigation Committee and China Chapter Chair of NYSBA International Section. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Sae Youn Kim		\n				\n				\n				\n							Sae Youn Kim is a partner of the International Arbitration & Cross-Border Litigation Practice of Kim & Chang. Ms. Kim practices primarily in the areas of international litigation and arbitration with an emphasis on commercial and international law. Before joining Kim & Chang\, she served as a judge at various Korean district courts\, and practiced as a key member in major Korean law firms. Ms. Kim also sits as an arbitrator. Her expertise in international dispute resolution has been recognized by the variety of roles she holds and held in various institutions\, including but not limited to a Commissioner of the Korea Trade Commission\, a Vice-Chair of the Arbitration Committee of the International Bar Association\, a Co-Chair of the Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Committee of the Inter-Pacific Bar Association\, and a member of the ICC Court. She is regularly selected as leading lawyer by publications such as Chambers and Partners\, Who’s Who Legal\, Legal 500\, and Asian Legal Business. Ms. Kim received an LL.M. from Duke University Law School in 2007\, and her LL.B. from Seoul National University College of Law in 1991. She graduated the Judicial Training and Research Institute by the Supreme Court of Korea in 1994. She speaks and practices in both Korean and English. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Vijayendra Pratap Singh		\n				\n				\n				\n							With over 20 years of experience\, Vijayendra Pratap Singh heads the Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice in Delhi. Vijayendra represents clients in international\, commercial and domestic arbitrations; corporate and commercial litigation; regulatory practices and securities law. He has advised various government departments\, such as the Department of Economic Affairs\, Ministry of Finance; Securities and Exchange Board of India; Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation; the Ministry of Consumer Affairs\, etc.\, on the de-criminalisation of various Statutes and has been involved in various policy making initiatives of the Government of India. Vijayendra’s expertise span domestic and international arbitration\, as well as disputes in various fora in India\, ranging from shareholder disputes to corporate actions. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Lawrence Teh (Moderator)		\n				\n				\n				\n							Lawrence Teh is the Global Co-Head of Dentons’ International Arbitration practice and a senior partner in Dentons Rodyk’s Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice group. He is Co-Head of Dentons Rodyk’s International Arbitration and Shipping practice groups. He has particular experience in handling commercial disputes including those of international trade and commodities\, maritime and aviation\, banking and financial services\, onshore and offshore construction\, mergers\, acquisitions\, joint ventures and other investments\, and insurance. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Attendance Policy		\n				\n				\n				\n							Participants who wish to obtain CPD Points are reminded that they must comply strictly with the Attendance Policy set out in the CPD Guidelines. For participants attending the face-to-face activity\, this includes signing in on arrival and signing out at the conclusion of the activity in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being absent from the activity for more than 15 minutes. For those participating via the webinar\, this includes logging in at the start of the webinar and logging out at the conclusion of the webinar in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being away from the activity for more than 15 minutes. Participants who do not comply with the Attendance Policy will not be able to obtain CPD Points for attending the activity. Please refer to https://www.silecpdcentre.sg for more information. Practice Area: Alternative Dispute Resolution Training Category: General 						\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Earn 1 Public CPD Point		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Terms & Conditions		\n				\n				\n				\n							1) Registration – Limited slots are available on a first-come-first-served basis. 2) Consent to data collection – You consent for Maxwell Chambers and their partners to collect\, use and disclose the personal data that you provide in this form for marketing purposes\, including adding you to their mailing list for industry updates. The Organiser reserves the right to cancel or alter the content and timing of the programme or the identity of the speakers. In the event that the webinar is cancelled by the Organiser\, the participants will be notified prior to the webinar. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Share		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n								\n						\n															\n																Share on facebook\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on twitter\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on linkedin\n							\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on whatsapp\n							\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/2026/06/19/theprivatecaucus-conversations-in-confidence-interview-series-mugeni/#new_tab
LOCATION:Singapore
CATEGORIES:Happenings by Maxwell Chambers
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/Mugeni-page-1.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Singapore:20260826T080000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Singapore:20260826T090000
DTSTAMP:20260620T115846
CREATED:20260508T082627Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20260515T014307Z
UID:10000900-1787731200-1787734800@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:Maxwell Lectures with Martina Polasek\, Secretary-General of ICSID
DESCRIPTION:Event Details		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Maxwell Conversations: Managing Public Policy | 29 August 2024		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n				\n				\n							Maxwell Conversations features leading personalities at the top of the international dispute resolution industry. These events seek to challenge assumptions with a deeper examination of the issues. Synposis  Public policy is an important element in determining the arbitrability of a dispute\, and also a ground on which an award may be annulled or refused enforcement. It has often been said that the public policy should be construed narrowly in keeping with the pro-arbitration policy of the New York Convention or the UNCITRAL Model Law. Held as part of Singapore Convention Week\, this session of Maxwell Conversations focused on the crucial role of public policy in international arbitration. The discussion highlighted how public policy influences the arbitrability of disputes and serves as grounds for annulling or refusing the enforcement of an award. While it is commonly understood that public policy should be interpreted narrowly\, aligning with the pro-arbitration stance of the New York Convention and UNCITRAL Model Law\, the event also shed light on less frequently discussed topics. The panel explored the importance of arbitrator independence and seat court review\, which are considered part of the “international public policy” of arbitration. This was contrasted with how courts may enforce annulled awards if they deem the annulment contrary to their own national public policy\, touching on issues like crime\, corruption\, or sovereignty. The discussion raised important questions about whether international and national public policies are opposing forces or if enforcing courts should consider multiple layers of public policy\, including the public policies of the governing law\, the seat of arbitration\, and how to navigate conflicts between these different frameworks. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n				\n				\n							The books referenced by Michael at the start of the session are: \n\nThe Public Policy Exception under the New York Convention\, Second Edition by Anton G. Maurer\nICCA’s Guide to the Interpretation of the 1958 New York Convention\, Second Edition\nGuide on the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards\, New York 1958 by the UNCITRAL Secretariat\n\nAdditional reference materials include: \n\nRe-calibration of curial intervention in public policy challenges against arbitral awards” written by Darius Chan and Elias Ngai of the Singapore Management University in the Journal of International Arbitration\n						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Q&A from the Lecture:		\n				\n				\n				\n							Q1: What are the potential challenges in the future for issuing arbitral awards? Are there any changes in environment or technology that may mitigate or worsen these challenges? \nQ2: What aspects of arbitration are ready for AI? \nQ3: What do you think are the key issues that need to be considered when using technology? \nQ4: About diversity\, I notice that the ICC now has an almost 50/50 male/female mix. Is this too fast and too artificial? \nQ5: For operating with ICC arbitration\, since the publishing of the ICC arbitration rules 2021 in the year of 2021\, which part of the arbitration rules 2021 would ICC suggest multi-national companies\, future expert witnesses\, future party representatives and future arbitrators to pay attention to as per ICC’s observation so far? \nQ6: What would ICC like expert witnesses\, party representatives\, and arbitrators to do (and prepare themselves) in order to operate ICC arbitration in line with ICC’s vision?  						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Watch the full recorded session below:		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										29 August 2024\, Thursday \n									\n								\n											\n													\n										8.00 am – 9:30 am (GMT+8)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										Singapore\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Organiser: Maxwell Chambers\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Format: Hybrid (In-person at Maxwell Chambers\, Online over Zoom)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																\n															\n															\n				\n				\n				\n					\n			\n							\n								\n							\n						\n				\n					CategoryFee (SGD)				\n			\n					\n					\n				\n			YouTube Livestreaming TicketFreeZoom Webinar Ticket$30*		\n					\n		\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Speakers		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Dr Michael Hwang		\n				\n				\n				\n							Dr Michael Hwang S.C. currently practises as an international arbitrator based in Singapore with a selective practice as Senior Counsel of the Supreme Court of Singapore. He served as the Chief Justice of the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) Courts from 2010 – 2018.   Dr Hwang’s other past appointments include: Judicial Commissioner of the Supreme Court of Singapore; Singapore’s Non-Resident Ambassador to Switzerland and Argentina; President of the Law Society of Singapore; Commissioner of the United Nations Compensation Commission; Vice Chairman of the ICC International Court of Arbitration; Vice President of the International Council of Commercial Arbitration (ICCA); and a Visiting (and later Adjunct) Professor of the National University of Singapore. He was educated at undergraduate and postgraduate levels at Oxford University\, where he won the Gordon Warter Scholarship from Pembroke College by open competitive examination. He has been conferred an Honorary LLD by the University of Sydney. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Jessica Fei		\n				\n				\n				\n							Jessica is a widely recognized leading international arbitration and dispute resolution specialist with close to 30 years’ experience working with international arbitration institutions and leading firms.  Constantly ranked and recommended by leading legal media including Chambers\, WWL\, Legal 500\, and ALB\, Jessica is one of the very few leading international arbitration practitioners (acting as counsel and arbitrator)  with dual qualifications (China and New York) as well as extensive cross-border dispute resolution experience between Chinese/Asian and Western parties. Jessica focuses her practice on international arbitration\, litigation and alternative disputes resolution. She sits regularly as arbitrator in commercial arbitration cases\, and is listed on the international arbitrator panels of the SIAC\, HKIAC\, CIETAC\, ICDR/AAA\, AIAC\, KCAB\, CEAC etc. Jessica is a court member of SIAC Court of Arbitration\, a member of the International/ Asia Advisory Committee of the AAA/ICDR\, a member of the CEAC Advisory Board\, VP of the UIA Litigation Committee and China Chapter Chair of NYSBA International Section. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Sae Youn Kim		\n				\n				\n				\n							Sae Youn Kim is a partner of the International Arbitration & Cross-Border Litigation Practice of Kim & Chang. Ms. Kim practices primarily in the areas of international litigation and arbitration with an emphasis on commercial and international law. Before joining Kim & Chang\, she served as a judge at various Korean district courts\, and practiced as a key member in major Korean law firms. Ms. Kim also sits as an arbitrator. Her expertise in international dispute resolution has been recognized by the variety of roles she holds and held in various institutions\, including but not limited to a Commissioner of the Korea Trade Commission\, a Vice-Chair of the Arbitration Committee of the International Bar Association\, a Co-Chair of the Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Committee of the Inter-Pacific Bar Association\, and a member of the ICC Court. She is regularly selected as leading lawyer by publications such as Chambers and Partners\, Who’s Who Legal\, Legal 500\, and Asian Legal Business. Ms. Kim received an LL.M. from Duke University Law School in 2007\, and her LL.B. from Seoul National University College of Law in 1991. She graduated the Judicial Training and Research Institute by the Supreme Court of Korea in 1994. She speaks and practices in both Korean and English. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Vijayendra Pratap Singh		\n				\n				\n				\n							With over 20 years of experience\, Vijayendra Pratap Singh heads the Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice in Delhi. Vijayendra represents clients in international\, commercial and domestic arbitrations; corporate and commercial litigation; regulatory practices and securities law. He has advised various government departments\, such as the Department of Economic Affairs\, Ministry of Finance; Securities and Exchange Board of India; Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation; the Ministry of Consumer Affairs\, etc.\, on the de-criminalisation of various Statutes and has been involved in various policy making initiatives of the Government of India. Vijayendra’s expertise span domestic and international arbitration\, as well as disputes in various fora in India\, ranging from shareholder disputes to corporate actions. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Lawrence Teh (Moderator)		\n				\n				\n				\n							Lawrence Teh is the Global Co-Head of Dentons’ International Arbitration practice and a senior partner in Dentons Rodyk’s Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice group. He is Co-Head of Dentons Rodyk’s International Arbitration and Shipping practice groups. He has particular experience in handling commercial disputes including those of international trade and commodities\, maritime and aviation\, banking and financial services\, onshore and offshore construction\, mergers\, acquisitions\, joint ventures and other investments\, and insurance. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Attendance Policy		\n				\n				\n				\n							Participants who wish to obtain CPD Points are reminded that they must comply strictly with the Attendance Policy set out in the CPD Guidelines. For participants attending the face-to-face activity\, this includes signing in on arrival and signing out at the conclusion of the activity in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being absent from the activity for more than 15 minutes. For those participating via the webinar\, this includes logging in at the start of the webinar and logging out at the conclusion of the webinar in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being away from the activity for more than 15 minutes. Participants who do not comply with the Attendance Policy will not be able to obtain CPD Points for attending the activity. Please refer to https://www.silecpdcentre.sg for more information. Practice Area: Alternative Dispute Resolution Training Category: General 						\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Earn 1 Public CPD Point		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Terms & Conditions		\n				\n				\n				\n							1) Registration – Limited slots are available on a first-come-first-served basis. 2) Consent to data collection – You consent for Maxwell Chambers and their partners to collect\, use and disclose the personal data that you provide in this form for marketing purposes\, including adding you to their mailing list for industry updates. The Organiser reserves the right to cancel or alter the content and timing of the programme or the identity of the speakers. In the event that the webinar is cancelled by the Organiser\, the participants will be notified prior to the webinar. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Share		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n								\n						\n															\n																Share on facebook\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on twitter\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on linkedin\n							\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on whatsapp\n							\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/event/maxwell-lectures-with-martina-polasek-secretary-general-of-icsid/
LOCATION:Singapore
CATEGORIES:Happenings by Maxwell Chambers,Seminar
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Maxwell-Lectures-Martina-Polasek-SAVE-THE-DATE-1.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Singapore:20260827T090000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Singapore:20260830T180000
DTSTAMP:20260620T115847
CREATED:20260129T040612Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20260129T040755Z
UID:10000819-1787821200-1788112800@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:[SC Week] Maxwell Challenge 2026
DESCRIPTION:Event Details		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Maxwell Conversations: Managing Public Policy | 29 August 2024		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n				\n				\n							Maxwell Conversations features leading personalities at the top of the international dispute resolution industry. These events seek to challenge assumptions with a deeper examination of the issues. Synposis  Public policy is an important element in determining the arbitrability of a dispute\, and also a ground on which an award may be annulled or refused enforcement. It has often been said that the public policy should be construed narrowly in keeping with the pro-arbitration policy of the New York Convention or the UNCITRAL Model Law. Held as part of Singapore Convention Week\, this session of Maxwell Conversations focused on the crucial role of public policy in international arbitration. The discussion highlighted how public policy influences the arbitrability of disputes and serves as grounds for annulling or refusing the enforcement of an award. While it is commonly understood that public policy should be interpreted narrowly\, aligning with the pro-arbitration stance of the New York Convention and UNCITRAL Model Law\, the event also shed light on less frequently discussed topics. The panel explored the importance of arbitrator independence and seat court review\, which are considered part of the “international public policy” of arbitration. This was contrasted with how courts may enforce annulled awards if they deem the annulment contrary to their own national public policy\, touching on issues like crime\, corruption\, or sovereignty. The discussion raised important questions about whether international and national public policies are opposing forces or if enforcing courts should consider multiple layers of public policy\, including the public policies of the governing law\, the seat of arbitration\, and how to navigate conflicts between these different frameworks. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n				\n				\n							The books referenced by Michael at the start of the session are: \n\nThe Public Policy Exception under the New York Convention\, Second Edition by Anton G. Maurer\nICCA’s Guide to the Interpretation of the 1958 New York Convention\, Second Edition\nGuide on the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards\, New York 1958 by the UNCITRAL Secretariat\n\nAdditional reference materials include: \n\nRe-calibration of curial intervention in public policy challenges against arbitral awards” written by Darius Chan and Elias Ngai of the Singapore Management University in the Journal of International Arbitration\n						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Q&A from the Lecture:		\n				\n				\n				\n							Q1: What are the potential challenges in the future for issuing arbitral awards? Are there any changes in environment or technology that may mitigate or worsen these challenges? \nQ2: What aspects of arbitration are ready for AI? \nQ3: What do you think are the key issues that need to be considered when using technology? \nQ4: About diversity\, I notice that the ICC now has an almost 50/50 male/female mix. Is this too fast and too artificial? \nQ5: For operating with ICC arbitration\, since the publishing of the ICC arbitration rules 2021 in the year of 2021\, which part of the arbitration rules 2021 would ICC suggest multi-national companies\, future expert witnesses\, future party representatives and future arbitrators to pay attention to as per ICC’s observation so far? \nQ6: What would ICC like expert witnesses\, party representatives\, and arbitrators to do (and prepare themselves) in order to operate ICC arbitration in line with ICC’s vision?  						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Watch the full recorded session below:		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n					\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										29 August 2024\, Thursday \n									\n								\n											\n													\n										8.00 am – 9:30 am (GMT+8)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n					\n							\n											\n													\n										Singapore\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Organiser: Maxwell Chambers\n									\n								\n											\n													\n										Format: Hybrid (In-person at Maxwell Chambers\, Online over Zoom)\n									\n						\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																\n															\n															\n				\n				\n				\n					\n			\n							\n								\n							\n						\n				\n					CategoryFee (SGD)				\n			\n					\n					\n				\n			YouTube Livestreaming TicketFreeZoom Webinar Ticket$30*		\n					\n		\n				\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Speakers		\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Dr Michael Hwang		\n				\n				\n				\n							Dr Michael Hwang S.C. currently practises as an international arbitrator based in Singapore with a selective practice as Senior Counsel of the Supreme Court of Singapore. He served as the Chief Justice of the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) Courts from 2010 – 2018.   Dr Hwang’s other past appointments include: Judicial Commissioner of the Supreme Court of Singapore; Singapore’s Non-Resident Ambassador to Switzerland and Argentina; President of the Law Society of Singapore; Commissioner of the United Nations Compensation Commission; Vice Chairman of the ICC International Court of Arbitration; Vice President of the International Council of Commercial Arbitration (ICCA); and a Visiting (and later Adjunct) Professor of the National University of Singapore. He was educated at undergraduate and postgraduate levels at Oxford University\, where he won the Gordon Warter Scholarship from Pembroke College by open competitive examination. He has been conferred an Honorary LLD by the University of Sydney. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Jessica Fei		\n				\n				\n				\n							Jessica is a widely recognized leading international arbitration and dispute resolution specialist with close to 30 years’ experience working with international arbitration institutions and leading firms.  Constantly ranked and recommended by leading legal media including Chambers\, WWL\, Legal 500\, and ALB\, Jessica is one of the very few leading international arbitration practitioners (acting as counsel and arbitrator)  with dual qualifications (China and New York) as well as extensive cross-border dispute resolution experience between Chinese/Asian and Western parties. Jessica focuses her practice on international arbitration\, litigation and alternative disputes resolution. She sits regularly as arbitrator in commercial arbitration cases\, and is listed on the international arbitrator panels of the SIAC\, HKIAC\, CIETAC\, ICDR/AAA\, AIAC\, KCAB\, CEAC etc. Jessica is a court member of SIAC Court of Arbitration\, a member of the International/ Asia Advisory Committee of the AAA/ICDR\, a member of the CEAC Advisory Board\, VP of the UIA Litigation Committee and China Chapter Chair of NYSBA International Section. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Sae Youn Kim		\n				\n				\n				\n							Sae Youn Kim is a partner of the International Arbitration & Cross-Border Litigation Practice of Kim & Chang. Ms. Kim practices primarily in the areas of international litigation and arbitration with an emphasis on commercial and international law. Before joining Kim & Chang\, she served as a judge at various Korean district courts\, and practiced as a key member in major Korean law firms. Ms. Kim also sits as an arbitrator. Her expertise in international dispute resolution has been recognized by the variety of roles she holds and held in various institutions\, including but not limited to a Commissioner of the Korea Trade Commission\, a Vice-Chair of the Arbitration Committee of the International Bar Association\, a Co-Chair of the Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Committee of the Inter-Pacific Bar Association\, and a member of the ICC Court. She is regularly selected as leading lawyer by publications such as Chambers and Partners\, Who’s Who Legal\, Legal 500\, and Asian Legal Business. Ms. Kim received an LL.M. from Duke University Law School in 2007\, and her LL.B. from Seoul National University College of Law in 1991. She graduated the Judicial Training and Research Institute by the Supreme Court of Korea in 1994. She speaks and practices in both Korean and English. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Vijayendra Pratap Singh		\n				\n				\n				\n							With over 20 years of experience\, Vijayendra Pratap Singh heads the Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice in Delhi. Vijayendra represents clients in international\, commercial and domestic arbitrations; corporate and commercial litigation; regulatory practices and securities law. He has advised various government departments\, such as the Department of Economic Affairs\, Ministry of Finance; Securities and Exchange Board of India; Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation; the Ministry of Consumer Affairs\, etc.\, on the de-criminalisation of various Statutes and has been involved in various policy making initiatives of the Government of India. Vijayendra’s expertise span domestic and international arbitration\, as well as disputes in various fora in India\, ranging from shareholder disputes to corporate actions. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Lawrence Teh (Moderator)		\n				\n				\n				\n							Lawrence Teh is the Global Co-Head of Dentons’ International Arbitration practice and a senior partner in Dentons Rodyk’s Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice group. He is Co-Head of Dentons Rodyk’s International Arbitration and Shipping practice groups. He has particular experience in handling commercial disputes including those of international trade and commodities\, maritime and aviation\, banking and financial services\, onshore and offshore construction\, mergers\, acquisitions\, joint ventures and other investments\, and insurance. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Attendance Policy		\n				\n				\n				\n							Participants who wish to obtain CPD Points are reminded that they must comply strictly with the Attendance Policy set out in the CPD Guidelines. For participants attending the face-to-face activity\, this includes signing in on arrival and signing out at the conclusion of the activity in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being absent from the activity for more than 15 minutes. For those participating via the webinar\, this includes logging in at the start of the webinar and logging out at the conclusion of the webinar in the manner required by the organiser\, and not being away from the activity for more than 15 minutes. Participants who do not comply with the Attendance Policy will not be able to obtain CPD Points for attending the activity. Please refer to https://www.silecpdcentre.sg for more information. Practice Area: Alternative Dispute Resolution Training Category: General 						\n				\n					\n		\n				\n			\n								\n				\n			Earn 1 Public CPD Point		\n				\n				\n				\n																														\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Terms & Conditions		\n				\n				\n				\n							1) Registration – Limited slots are available on a first-come-first-served basis. 2) Consent to data collection – You consent for Maxwell Chambers and their partners to collect\, use and disclose the personal data that you provide in this form for marketing purposes\, including adding you to their mailing list for industry updates. The Organiser reserves the right to cancel or alter the content and timing of the programme or the identity of the speakers. In the event that the webinar is cancelled by the Organiser\, the participants will be notified prior to the webinar. 						\n				\n					\n		\n							\n		\n				\n						\n					\n			\n								\n				\n			Share		\n				\n				\n				\n					\n								\n						\n															\n																Share on facebook\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on twitter\n							\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on linkedin\n							\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n																Share on whatsapp\n							\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/maxwellchallenge/#new_tab
LOCATION:Singapore
CATEGORIES:Happenings by Maxwell Chambers
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/Events-Featured-Image-17-1.png
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR