The International Law Association–American Branch has posted the video of the International Law Weekend panel on cross-border service, which focused significantly on the issues in the Rockefeller case. Check it out!
My fellow panelists gave strong, interesting presentations. Gifany Ten-Ten L. Tongohan presented an opposing view to mine, arguing that in cases ancillary to arbitration, for example actions to confirm an arbitral award, the Service Convention should not apply. Leaving aside the merits, the main question in my mind about her view is, what motivates it? To take the Rockefeller situation as an example: since we already have the New York Convention, and it is simpler and frankly more effective to take an award to China for recognition under the New York Convention than to take a California judgment confirming an award to China for recognition under Chinese law, what is the point of seeking to limit the Service Convention’s scope? Robin Effron also gave an interesting talk about how notice works, and doesn’t work, in the class action context. And Lemuel Lopez gave an overview of the approaches to choice of forum clauses in several Asian jurisdictions.
If you are looking in particular for my presentation, it starts at about 30:35.
Leave a Reply