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:20250330T010000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0200
TZOFFSETTO:+0100
TZNAME:CET
DTSTART:20251026T010000
END:STANDARD
TZID:Europe/Berlin
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0100
TZOFFSETTO:+0200
TZNAME:CEST
DTSTART:20250330T010000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0200
TZOFFSETTO:+0100
TZNAME:CET
DTSTART:20251026T010000
END:STANDARD
TZID:Asia/Kolkata
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0530
TZOFFSETTO:+0530
TZNAME:IST
DTSTART:20250101T000000
END:STANDARD
TZID:Europe/Istanbul
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0300
TZOFFSETTO:+0300
TZNAME:+03
DTSTART:20250101T000000
END:STANDARD
TZID:America/Chicago
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:-0600
TZOFFSETTO:-0500
TZNAME:CDT
DTSTART:20250309T080000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0500
TZOFFSETTO:-0600
TZNAME:CST
DTSTART:20251102T070000
END:STANDARD
TZID:America/New_York
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:-0500
TZOFFSETTO:-0400
TZNAME:EDT
DTSTART:20250309T070000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0400
TZOFFSETTO:-0500
TZNAME:EST
DTSTART:20251102T060000
END:STANDARD
TZID:America/Sao_Paulo
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0300
TZOFFSETTO:-0300
TZNAME:-03
DTSTART:20250101T000000
END:STANDARD
TZID:Europe/Helsinki
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0200
TZOFFSETTO:+0300
TZNAME:EEST
DTSTART:20250330T010000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0300
TZOFFSETTO:+0200
TZNAME:EET
DTSTART:20251026T010000
END:STANDARD
TZID:Australia/Sydney
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+1100
TZOFFSETTO:+1000
TZNAME:AEST
DTSTART:20250405T160000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+1000
TZOFFSETTO:+1100
TZNAME:AEDT
DTSTART:20251004T160000
END:DAYLIGHT
TZID:Africa/Cairo
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0200
TZOFFSETTO:+0300
TZNAME:EEST
DTSTART:20250424T220000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0300
TZOFFSETTO:+0200
TZNAME:EET
DTSTART:20251030T210000
END:STANDARD
TZID:Asia/Seoul
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0900
TZOFFSETTO:+0900
TZNAME:KST
DTSTART:20250101T000000
END:STANDARD
TZID:Asia/Qatar
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0300
TZOFFSETTO:+0300
TZNAME:+03
DTSTART:20250101T000000
END:STANDARD
TZID:Asia/Dubai
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0400
TZOFFSETTO:+0400
TZNAME:+04
DTSTART:20250101T000000
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Singapore:20250829T170000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Singapore:20250829T190000
DTSTAMP:20260910T115222
CREATED:20250814T072629Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250814T072813Z
UID:10000671-1756486800-1756494000@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:Creating Connections: A Mediation Networking 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															\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.eventbrite.nl/e/creating-connections-a-networking-evening-for-the-mediation-community-tickets-1508947064289#new_tab
LOCATION:Singapore
CATEGORIES:Networking,Singapore Events
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/Events-Featured-Image-2.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Singapore:20250903T090000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Singapore:20250904T170000
DTSTAMP:20260910T115222
CREATED:20250725T065527Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250725T065527Z
UID:10000659-1756890000-1757005200@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:2025 ASIL Abroad - Singapore
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															\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.asil.org/2025-asil-abroad-singapore#new_tab
LOCATION:Singapore
CATEGORIES:Conference,Singapore Events
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Events-Featured-Image-28.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Paris:20250904T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Paris:20250905T234500
DTSTAMP:20260910T115222
CREATED:20250721T084936Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250721T084936Z
UID:10000654-1757001600-1757115900@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:ARB FEST 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															\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://scottisharbitrationcentre.org/arbfest2025/#new_tab
LOCATION:Edinburgh\, Scotland\, United Kingdom
CATEGORIES:Conference,Outside of Asia-Pacific
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Events-Featured-Image-26.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20250908
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20250913
DTSTAMP:20260910T115223
CREATED:20241223T030123Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250428T080651Z
UID:10000449-1757289600-1757721599@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:2025 FALL CONFERENCE Los Angeles California
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															\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.linkedin.com/posts/aba-section-of-international-law_la-fallconference-entertainment-activity-7275613921305104386-tpyR?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop#new_tab
LOCATION:California\, United States
CATEGORIES:Conference,Outside of Asia-Pacific
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/ABA-International-Law-Section-LOGO.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Berlin:20250908T073000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Berlin:20250911T210000
DTSTAMP:20260910T115223
CREATED:20250725T030625Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250725T030625Z
UID:10000657-1757316600-1757624400@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:Berlin Dispute Resolution Days 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															\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.berlin-dispute-resolution-days.de/#new_tab
LOCATION:Germany\, Germany
CATEGORIES:Conference,Outside of Asia-Pacific
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/DIS-German-Arbitration-Institute.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Paris:20250909T090000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Paris:20250909T170000
DTSTAMP:20260910T115223
CREATED:20241218T050816Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20241218T050816Z
UID:10000440-1757408400-1757437200@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:DIS Autumn Conference 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															\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.disarb.org/en/save-the-date-dis-autumn-conference-2025#new_tab
LOCATION:Germany\, Germany
CATEGORIES:Conference,Outside of Asia-Pacific
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Events-Featured-Image-3.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Singapore:20250910T090000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Singapore:20250911T173000
DTSTAMP:20260910T115224
CREATED:20250626T072314Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250626T072314Z
UID:10000638-1757494800-1757611800@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:TechLaw.Fest 2025: Reimagining Legal in the Digital Age
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															\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.techlawfest.com/2025-homepage#new_tab
LOCATION:Singapore
CATEGORIES:Conference,Singapore Events
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/Events-Featured-Image-13.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20250915T090000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20250919T170000
DTSTAMP:20260910T115224
CREATED:20250814T090626Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250814T090626Z
UID:10000674-1757926800-1758301200@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:India ADR Week 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															\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.adrweek.in/#new_tab
LOCATION:India\, India
CATEGORIES:Asia Pacific,Conference
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/Events-Featured-Image-5.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20250916
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20250920
DTSTAMP:20260910T115224
CREATED:20241018T080503Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20241018T080503Z
UID:10000393-1757980800-1758326399@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:Istanbul Arbitration Days 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															\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://istanbularbitrationdays.com/#new_tab
LOCATION:Istanbul\, Turkey
CATEGORIES:Conference,Outside of Asia-Pacific
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Istanbul-Arbitration-Days.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20250916
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20250920
DTSTAMP:20260910T115224
CREATED:20241018T084543Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250402T093206Z
UID:10000395-1757980800-1758326399@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:Cyprus Arbitration Day 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															\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://cad.com.cy/#new_tab
LOCATION:Turkey\, Turkey
CATEGORIES:Conference,Outside of Asia-Pacific
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Cyprus-Arbitration-Day-2025.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20250917
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20250919
DTSTAMP:20260910T115224
CREATED:20250110T055844Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250402T091237Z
UID:10000468-1758067200-1758239999@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:IPBA Arbitration Day 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															\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/event/ipba-arbitration-day-2025/
LOCATION:Mumbai\, India\, India
CATEGORIES:Conference,Outside of Asia-Pacific
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/IPBA-website.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20250918
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20250920
DTSTAMP:20260910T115224
CREATED:20241220T063544Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20241220T063544Z
UID:10000447-1758153600-1758326399@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:20th ICC New York Conference on International 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															\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://2go.iccwbo.org/icc-new-york-conference-on-international-arbitration.html?msdynttrid=KqRjGpdytdoaFFE4HVFx5Wg0sYuvIwzG_cM2JCmzN94#sponsorship#new_tab
LOCATION:New York
CATEGORIES:Conference,Outside of Asia-Pacific
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/ICC-Dispute-Resolution-Services.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Singapore:20250925T080000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Singapore:20250925T193000
DTSTAMP:20260910T115224
CREATED:20250424T091910Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250424T091910Z
UID:10000582-1758787200-1758828600@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:Annual Construction Law Conference 2025: Transformation in the Infrastructure & Energy Sectors
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															\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.scl.org.sg/events-main/upcoming-events/icalrepeat.detail/2025/09/25/398/-/scl-s-conference-2025-transformation-in-the-infrastructure-energy-sectors-25-september-2025-8-15am-7-15pm-gmt-8.html#new_tab
LOCATION:Singapore
CATEGORIES:Conference,Singapore Events
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Society-of-Construction-Law.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Singapore:20250929T170000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Singapore:20250929T180000
DTSTAMP:20260910T115224
CREATED:20250928T032936Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250929T065521Z
UID:10000695-1759165200-1759168800@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:Energy Arbitration and the Importance of Governing Law in Tense Geopolitical Times
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															\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.linkedin.com/posts/arbitra-international_invitation-activity-7374028951335366656-Qdqp#new_tab
LOCATION:Singapore
CATEGORIES:Seminar,Singapore Events
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/Events-Featured-Image.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Sao_Paulo:20251002T090000
DTEND;TZID=America/Sao_Paulo:20251003T180000
DTSTAMP:20260910T115224
CREATED:20250703T084752Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250703T084752Z
UID:10000641-1759395600-1759514400@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:AIEN/ICC: Dispute Resolution in the Energy Business
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															\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://2go.iccwbo.org/catalog/product/view/id/871/s/aien-icc-dispute-resolution-in-the-energy-business/#description#new_tab
LOCATION:Rio de Janeiro\, Brazil\, Brazil
CATEGORIES:Conference,Outside of Asia-Pacific
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Events-Featured-Image-14.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Helsinki:20251006T090000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Helsinki:20251007T180000
DTSTAMP:20260910T115224
CREATED:20250813T013930Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250813T013930Z
UID:10000663-1759741200-1759860000@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:ICC Croatia Regional Conference: Construction Project Disputes
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															\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://2go.iccwbo.org/annual-regional-conference-on-arbitration-and-adr.html#description#new_tab
LOCATION:Dubrovnik\, Croatia\, Croatia (Local Name: Hrvatska)
CATEGORIES:Conference,Outside of Asia-Pacific
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Events-Featured-Image-27.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20251007
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20251008
DTSTAMP:20260910T115225
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															\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\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;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20251007T080000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20251011T170000
DTSTAMP:20260910T115225
CREATED:20251006T103036Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20251006T103036Z
UID:10000706-1759824000-1760202000@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:AIAC’s ASIA ADR WEEK 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															\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://siac.org.sg/event/aiacs-asia-adr-week-2025#new_tab
LOCATION:Malaysia\, Malaysia
CATEGORIES:Asia Pacific,Conference
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Screenshot-2025-10-06-at-6.13.54-PM.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20251012
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20251018
DTSTAMP:20260910T115225
CREATED:20241121T025424Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20241121T025424Z
UID:10000428-1760227200-1760745599@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:Australian Arbitration Week (AAW) 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															\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.linkedin.com/company/australian-centre-for-international-commercial-arbitration/posts/
LOCATION:sydey\, Australia
CATEGORIES:Asia Pacific,Conference
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Australian-Arbitration-Week.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Africa/Cairo:20251014T080000
DTEND;TZID=Africa/Cairo:20251014T190000
DTSTAMP:20260910T115225
CREATED:20251006T095035Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20251006T095035Z
UID:10000704-1760428800-1760468400@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:ICC Court Egypt Arbitration Day
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															\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.linkedin.com/posts/icc-arbitration_icccourt-iccarbitration-activity-7379455119446142976-uDGt?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop&rcm=ACoAAC1i-TEB2Ay66YdFwF395fkvUfSrcpnXm8c#new_tab
LOCATION:Egypt
CATEGORIES:Conference,Outside of Asia-Pacific
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/ICC-Dispute-Resolution-Services.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20251015
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20251016
DTSTAMP:20260910T115225
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															\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\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;VALUE=DATE:20251019
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20251025
DTSTAMP:20260910T115225
CREATED:20241220T061440Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250701T011053Z
UID:10000444-1760832000-1761350399@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:Hong Kong Arbitration Week 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															\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.hkiac.org/events/2025-hong-kong-arbitration-week#:~:text=The%202025%20Hong%20Kong%20Arbitration,at%20hkaweek%40hkiac.org.#new_tab
LOCATION:Hong Kong\, Hong Kong
CATEGORIES:Asia Pacific,Conference
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/HKIAC-Featured-Image.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Singapore:20251021T170000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Singapore:20251021T190000
DTSTAMP:20260910T115225
CREATED:20250926T171233Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250926T171750Z
UID:10000540-1761066000-1761073200@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:Flag in or flag out: Navigating fraud and corruption in international 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															\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://events2go.iccwbo.org/event/arbitrating-with-red-flags-navigating-fraud-and-corruption-in-international-arbitration#new_tab
LOCATION:Singapore
CATEGORIES:Conference,Singapore Events
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/ICC-Dispute-Resolution-Services.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Singapore:20251022T170000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Singapore:20251022T200000
DTSTAMP:20260910T115225
CREATED:20250718T051659Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250718T051659Z
UID:10000652-1761152400-1761163200@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:SIArb Annual Lecture 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															\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://siarb.org.sg/#new_tab
LOCATION:Singapore
CATEGORIES:Conference,Seminar,Singapore Events
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/SIArb-1.png
ORGANIZER;CN="Singapore Institute of Arbitrators":MAILTO:secretariat@siarb.org.sg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20251027
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20251101
DTSTAMP:20260910T115225
CREATED:20251001T083244Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20251001T090949Z
UID:10000701-1761523200-1761955199@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:Seoul ADR Festival 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															\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.seouladrfestival.com
LOCATION:Seoul\, South Korea\, Seoul\, Korea\, Republic of
CATEGORIES:Asia Pacific,Conference,Supported Events
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/KCAB-Featured-Image.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Seoul:20251028T140000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Seoul:20251028T170000
DTSTAMP:20260910T115225
CREATED:20251006T103924Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20251006T104007Z
UID:10000707-1761660000-1761670800@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:SIAC Seoul Conference 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															\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://siac.org.sg/event/siac-seoul-conference-2025
LOCATION:Seoul\, South Korea\, Seoul\, Korea\, Republic of
CATEGORIES:Asia Pacific,Conference,Supported Events
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/SIAC-Logo-High-Res.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Seoul:20251029T083000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Seoul:20251029T200000
DTSTAMP:20260910T115225
CREATED:20251022T081310Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20251022T081532Z
UID:10000717-1761726600-1761768000@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:The 14th Asia-Pacific ADR Conference
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															\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.adrconference.com/?ckattempt=1
LOCATION:Seoul\, South Korea\, Seoul\, Korea\, Republic of
CATEGORIES:Asia Pacific,Conference
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/KCAB-Featured-Image.png
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Qatar:20251029T090000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Qatar:20251030T180000
DTSTAMP:20260910T115225
CREATED:20250110T074023Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250110T074023Z
UID:10000474-1761728400-1761847200@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:Ciarb Global Conference 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															\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.ciarb.org/events/ciarb-global-conference-2025/?tab=id-Overview#id-Overview#new_tab
LOCATION:Qatar\, Qatar
CATEGORIES:Conference,Outside of Asia-Pacific
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/ciarb.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Singapore:20251029T171500
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Singapore:20251029T184500
DTSTAMP:20260910T115225
CREATED:20250926T174154Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250926T174459Z
UID:10000698-1761758100-1761763500@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer -SMU Asian Arbitration Lecture 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															\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://site.smu.edu.sg/herbert-smith-freehills-kramer-smu-asian-arbitration-lecture-2025#new_tab
LOCATION:Singapore
CATEGORIES:Seminar,Singapore Events
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/smu-centre-for-commercial-law-Logo.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Dubai:20251029T180000
DTEND;TZID=Asia/Dubai:20251029T203000
DTSTAMP:20260910T115225
CREATED:20251027T014541Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20251027T015033Z
UID:10000720-1761760800-1761769800@www.maxwellchambers.com
SUMMARY:SIAC-JAMS-NYIAC Trick or Treat: Ghostbusting Procedural Issues in International 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															\n																						\n																			\n										Facebook									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										Twitter									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										LinkedIn									\n																	\n													\n					\n									\n						\n															\n															\n																						\n																			\n										WhatsApp
URL:https://www.linkedin.com/posts/singapore-international-arbitration-centre_siac-jams-nyiac-trick-or-treat-ghostbusting-activity-7387035054247649280-Vfzw?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop&rcm=ACoAAC1i-TEB2Ay66YdFwF395fkvUfSrcpnXm8c#new_tab
LOCATION:New York
CATEGORIES:Conference,Outside of Asia-Pacific
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/png:https://www.maxwellchambers.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/SIAC-Logo-High-Res.png
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR