Dubai, Stockholm and São Paulo have so far attracted least response in GAR's Seat Index, survey but Cairo and Kuala Lumpur are not far behind. Only Vienna has generated enough data to go forward to the next stage. Fortunately ...
... there's still a week to go, and it's easy to take part.
In April GAR called for assistance to evaluate six new seats – Cairo, Dubai, Kuala Lumpur, São Paulo, Stockholm and Vienna – for the GAR-CIArb Seat Index.
Readers were asked to use an online form to tell us how they measure up to the CIArb London Principles.
So far, however, the majority of response has covered Vienna. No other seat has yet reached the critical mass required to go forward.
Fortunately, for readers connected to Cairo, Dubai, Stockholm, Sao Paolo or Kuala Lumpur – there's still a week to go.
You can find the on-line survey here.
It's simple to use - and takes about 10 minutes.
GAR Launched the GAR-CIArb Seat Index in November 2018. At present it comprises six seats: Hong Kong, London, New York, Paris, Singapore and Switzerland (both Geneva and Zurich.
The Index gives readers handy one-page summaries of the favourableness of individual arbitral seats against a range of standard criteria, capturing the essence of each seat.
Once enough seats have been added to the list, the team will be adding “ratings” – AAA, AA, A, BBB, BB etc.
The reports for Hong Kong, London, New York, Paris, Singapore and Switzerland (both Geneva and Zurich are also being revised.
Readers who would like to supply feedback on those seats should also get in touch. Please write to the Seat Index research team at email@example.com, after having looked at the relevant report; or use the online survey form to provide comments (scroll through to the very last question which asks about the current reports).
All comments will be anonymised before they are shared with the project team.
Online research will close on 24 May.
The Index uses a multi-step process. First GAR readers contribute personal accounts about seats – and how they perform against 10 ideal scenarios as set out in the London Principles. A panel of assessors then reviews those responses and prepare reports.
These include Reza Mohtashami (Three Crowns), Patricia Nacimiento, (Herbert Smith Freehills), Louise Reilly (independent barrister and arbitrator, Ireland), Patricia Peterson (independent arbitrator, Paris), Benjamin Hughes (independent arbitrator, Singapore), and Oscar Aitken (Cary). (Last year our assessors were: Francísco Cossío (González de Cossío Abogados), Daniel Kalderimis (Chapman Tripp), Sae Youn Kim (Yulchon), Larry Schaner (Schaner Dispute Resolution) and Nathalie Voser (Schellenberg Wittmer).) The assessors are “convened” by Professor Janet Walker (Arbitration Place).
Assessors work in pairs and don’t review seats with which they have a personal connection. Their reports go to a panel of senior arbitrators – the advisory panel – who provide further remarks.
The final reports then go to the project’s co-chairs, Lord Peter Goldsmith QC and Doug Jones AO, who write the texts with the aid of GAR.
GAR readers are therefore cordially invited to take part in the first step – and provide the raw material for the survey reports, via our online survey.
Select the seat you wish to comment on and leave a few remarks in the boxes provided that reflect your personal experience or observations. Depending on thinking time, it ought to take a maximum of 10 to 15 minutes.
All contributions are received in total confidence.
The second edition of the GAR-CIArb index with the six new reports will be published later this year.