London Summer Arbitration School 2026
Reiter
Attention!
This teaching platform will not be available on Tuesday, 16 June 2026, due to scheduled updates.
Please download all materials needed for your Tuesday classes in advance.
London Summer Arbitration School
15-19 June 2026
Please find the programme of the London Summer Arbitration School (as of 12 June 2026) here.
Zoom | We will be using Zoom for the online format of the school.
- We kindly ask you to switch on your camera during the classes.
- Please make sure that you are in a place where you can speak in order to actively participate in the discussions.
- Please indicate your real first and last name when joining.
- We will open the Zoom room 10 minutes before the start of the opening lecture, classes and keynote lecture respectively.
Zoom login for all classes
- Zoom login: https://unibas.zoom.us/j/64031588684?pwd=qk4GkKEv6gVYhLhVCB051KI4IbD9ud.1
- Meeting-ID: 640 3158 8684
Zoom login for the Opening Keynote
- Please use the following link to register in advance for the opening keynote on Tuesday, 16 June 2026.
- The lecture will start at 16:30 BST, you can only log in if you have registered in advance.
Zoom login for the Closing Keynote
- Please use the following link to register in advance for the closing keynote on Friday, 19 June 2026.
- The lecture will start at 17:00 BST, you can only log in if you have registered in advance.
Photo competition "The Spirit of the LSAS"
- Participants - individually or in groups - can submit up to three pictures that capture "The Spirit of the LSAS" for our photo competition.
- Online participants are particularly encouraged to submit images that give us their perspective on the LSAS 2026.
- Please upload your photos here.
- Please caption your picture(s) with your surname(s).
- The deadline for submission is Thursday, 18 June 2026, 17:30 BST.
- The winner will be announced at the end of the LSAS.
Letter to the participants dated 1 June 2026 here.
You find the Arbitration LAB School Regulations (as of 10 March 2025) here.
At the Centre for Transnational Legal Studies, where the classes take place, you have free internet access:
- WiFi: CTLSGuest
- Password: transnationallegalstudies
- Classes (Monday, 15 June 2026 to Friday, 19 June 2026): Centre for Transnational Legal Studies, 4th Floor, North West Wing, Bush House, Aldwych, London WC2B 4PJ
- Opening keynote and reception (Tuesday, 16 June 2025, 16:30-17:30 BST): Centre for Transnational Legal Studies, 4th Floor, North West Wing, Bush House, Aldwych, London WC2B 4PJ
- Closing keynote and reception (Friday, 19 June 2026, 17:00-18:00 BST lecture, reception from 18:00 BST): Osborne Clarke, One London Wall, London EC2Y 5EB
Lunch options: Quick lunch options near the Centre for Transnational Legal Studies: Map.
Public transport: For up-to-date information on public transport download the Citymapper App.
You find the list of participants here (as of 12 June 2026).
Information and teaching materials
- Below you find information and teaching materials for all classes of the London Summer Arbitration School as well as information regarding the opening lecture and keynote lecture.
- The teaching materials can be accessed in the following way:
- If you want to download a specific item, please click on the respective link and open it in a separate tap; click the black button "Download File".
- If you prefer downloading all materials of one kind in one go (e.g. all slides or all readings), please scroll to the bottom of this page where you find the respective folders; click on the arrow next to the folder and press "Download".
Preparations and mandatory readings
- Readings
- For each class, we indicate the readings that you should have completed before the class; they are flagged as "mandatory readings".
- Please note that the speakers assume that you have read the materials flagged as "mandatory readings".
- In addition, you may also read the materials flagged as "optional readings". While this is not mandatory, it may greatly enhance your understanding of the respective topic.
- Rules
- As a general rule, there is no need to read the rules before the class. Rather, the documents comprising rules are a working tool for the students.
- Exceptionally and only where explicitly required to do so, you need to read specific legal bases.
Martins Paparinskis
Professor Martins Paparinskis is Professor of Public International Law at UCL. He is a member of the United Nations International Law Commission and its Special Rapporteur on compensation for the damage caused by internationally wrongful acts, and has been its Chairperson. He is also an associate member of the Institute of International Law, a member of the Permanent Court of Arbitration, a member of the Board of the OSCE Court of Conciliation and Arbitration, and a member of the ICSID Panel of Arbitrators.
The contemporary public international law of compensation is addressed in a rich body of decisions by inter-State courts and tribunals as well as bodies considering claims brought by individuals and other non-State entities, including investor-State arbitration tribunals. In 2025, the United Nations International Law Commission included the topic ‘compensation for the damage caused by internationally wrongful acts’ in its current programme of work. The keynote will reflect on the key legal and practical issues relevant for international dispute settlement that have been identified in the first report on this topic, to be discussed in the 2026 session of the International Law Commission.
All online participants are requested to register in advance for the opening lecture under the following link.
There are no slides for the Opening Keynote.
Please read before the start of the LSAS 2026 the following text:
Charles H Brower II, 'Arbitration' in Anne Peters (ed), Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (Oxford University Press 2007); mandatory reading before the class.
Prof. Dr. Yarik Kryvoi, LL.M. (Harvard)
Professor Yarik Kryvoi is the Senior Fellow in International Economic Law and Director of the Investment Treaty Forum at the British Institute of International and Comparative Law in London. He is also a member of the New York State Bar (USA). Before moving to academia, he practiced law with Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer in London, Morgan Lewis & Bockius in Washington, DC and Baker & McKenzie in Saint Petersburg. He is currently engaged in a number of law reform and capacity building projects for the United Nations, governmental agencies and academic institutions. He is listed as an arbitrator by several institutions, including Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre, Asian International Arbitration Centre and Shenzhen Court of International Arbitration. He is also the founder of the CIS Arbitration Forum. Professor Kryvoi has authored a number of articles and monographs, primarily in the area of international dispute resolution and has also conducted several empirical studies in partnership with leading law firms. His recently published works include Private or Public Adjudication? Procedure, Substance and Legitimacy (Leiden Journal of International Law, 2021), International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (Kluwer Law International, 2020). He is also creator and director of the online course International Investment Law and Dispute Resolution.
Readings
Yarik Kryvoi, ‘Key Concepts of International Arbitration’ in Anna Petrig and Yarik Kryvoi (eds), The Anatomy of International Arbitration (Routledge, draft chapter, forthcoming 2025). mandatory reading before the class.
Slides: You find the slides of Class 1 here.
- What are the three most significant new insights you have gained about arbitration during this class?
- Based on the assigned reading by Prof. Kryvoi, how do partial and total challenges to the jurisdiction of arbitration tribunals differ?
- Referring to the assigned reading and the lecture, what are the main challenges to the effectiveness of arbitration as a dispute resolution mechanism? Are there any other challenges you can identify?
James Clanchy
James Clanchy, FCIArb, is a full-time arbitrator in independent practice and a former Honorary Secretary of the London Maritime Arbitrators Association (LMAA). He is an associate member of Six Pump Court chambers in London. As an arbitrator, he has taken appointments in ad hoc and institutional arbitrations, seated in London, Dubai, Singapore and Copenhagen, as a sole arbitrator and as a member of two and three member tribunals. His cases largely concern charterparties, ship sale and purchase, container leases, and commodities trading. He has written more than 40 awards. He is a solicitor in England & Wales (admitted 1990, non-practising since 2019) and was an avocat at the Paris bar from 1994 to 2008. He spent 20 years as a commercial disputes lawyer in London and Paris, with Withers, Holman Fenwick Willan, and Stephenson Harwood, specialising in shipping, oil and gas, and international trade. He was Registrar and Deputy Director General of the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA) for four years (2008 to 2012). He spent two years as a case assessor for third-party funders and After The Event (ATE) insurers. He is a co-author of A Commentary on the LCIA Arbitration Rules 2014 (Sweet & Maxwell, 2015). He has given lectures and spoken at conferences about the LCIA, the LMAA, third-party funding, and professional ethics. He has been a contributor to Lexis PSL Arbitration and New Law Journal. His International Congress of Maritime Arbitrators 2020 paper, “Ad hoc arbitration and its enemies”, was published in Arbitration 86, no 4 (2020). Since July 2022 he has been co-editor (arbitration) of Lloyd’s Maritime Law Newsletter.
Readings
Eva Litina, Theory, Law and Practice of Maritime Arbitration (Kluwer Law International 2020) 24-53 (excerpt of 'Chapter 1: Theoretical Background'); mandatory reading before the class.
Rules
The London Maritime Arbitrators Association: The LMAA Terms 2021
Slides: You find the slides of Class 2 here .
- What factors make maritime arbitration distinctive?
- How is an ad hoc London maritime arbitration commenced and how might the LMAA (London Maritime Arbitrators Association) Terms be introduced to govern the procedure?
- Does maritime arbitration have an image problem?
Arif Ali
Prof. Arif Hyder Ali is the founder of AHALI, a boutique dispute resolution-focused law firm based in Washington, D.C. and London. For over three decades, Mr. Ali has served as an arbitrator and represented parties in disputes in investor-state, commercial, and construction arbitrations under all the major arbitral regimes and the laws of over 50 civil and common law jurisdictions, as well as Islamic law and public international law. Prior to establishing AHALI, Mr. Ali headed the international arbitration practices at three Am Law 100 firms, most recently serving as the global co-chair of Dechert LLP’s International Arbitration Practice Group. In addition to publishing multiple books as lead author and more than 50 articles, Mr. Ali has held positions at leading academic institutions (Georgetown University Law Center, University of Dundee’s Centre for Energy, Mineral Law, and Policy) as an adjunct law professor, honorary lecturer and global faculty member.
Readings
Arif H. Ali, 'Chapter 2: Agreements to Arbitrate' in Arif Hyder Ali and others (eds), The International Arbitration Rulebook: A Guide to Arbitral Regimes (Kluwer Law International 2019) 121-198; mandatory reading before the class.
Slides: You can find the slides of Class 3 here.
- What are the mandatory elements of an enforceable arbitration clause and what elements are good practice?
- What law governs the arbitration agreement?
- In a clause negotiation scenario, would you recommend compromising on the governing law of an agreement or the seat of arbitration?
Arif Ali
Prof. Arif Hyder Ali is the founder of AHALI, a boutique dispute resolution-focused law firm based in Washington, D.C. and London. For over three decades, Mr. Ali has served as an arbitrator and represented parties in disputes in investor-state, commercial, and construction arbitrations under all the major arbitral regimes and the laws of over 50 civil and common law jurisdictions, as well as Islamic law and public international law. Prior to establishing AHALI, Mr. Ali headed the international arbitration practices at three Am Law 100 firms, most recently serving as the global co-chair of Dechert LLP’s International Arbitration Practice Group. In addition to publishing multiple books as lead author and more than 50 articles, Mr. Ali has held positions at leading academic institutions (Georgetown University Law Center, University of Dundee’s Centre for Energy, Mineral Law, and Policy) as an adjunct law professor, honorary lecturer and global faculty member.
Readings
Arif H. Ali, 'Chapter 6: Evidentiary Procedure' in Arif Hyder Ali and others (eds), The International Arbitration Rulebook: A Guide to Arbitral Regimes (Kluwer Law International 2019) 369-414; mandatory reading before the class.
Slides: You can find the slides of Class 4 here.
- What are the differences in evidentiary procedure in court in your home jurisdiction and in international arbitration?
- What is the difference between the burden and standard of proof?
- What law applies to evidence and evidentiary procedure in international arbitration?
Jonathan Waters
Jonathan Waters is General Counsel of the Grain and Feed Trade Association (GAFTA). He is a barrister, arbitrator and Civil Mediation Council Registered Mediator and has held a number of senior in-house positions in a variety of business sectors, including retail and leisure, healthcare and insurance. Jonathan has over 30 years PQE, having advised clients, ranging from those listed on the London Stock Exchange to small-medium enterprises, and specialises in international arbitration, dispute resolution and commercial contracts. He has been involved in a number of key reported legal cases involving company law and directors duties. He is a member of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators and has a Masters Degree in Economic Relations and Employment Law. He presents at international conferences and spent twelve years as a part-time law lecturer. Jonathan is the 2020 winner of International Arbitration Advisory Expert of the Year in the UK (Global Advisory Experts) and the Alternative Dispute Resolution UK award (Finance Monthly M&A Awards). He has also been included in Lawyer Magazine's "Hot 100" lawyers.
Readings
There are no readings for this class.
Rules
The Grain and Feed Trade Association: Gafta Arbitration Rules 125.
The Grain and Feed Trade Association: Gafta Contract 49.
Slides: You can find the slides of Class 5 here.
- In your opinion, why is GAFTA arbitration more advantageous than going to court?
- Does a party have to be a GAFTA member to arbitrate before GAFTA?
- What are the advantages and disadvantages of trade arbitration?
Anna Petrig
Anna Petrig holds the Chair of International Law and Public Law at the University of Basel in Switzerland. She has a PhD in the field of the law of the sea and human rights law and an LL.M. from Harvard Law School where she studied as a Fulbright scholar. Anna is a member of the Bar of the Canton of Berne (Switzerland) and the New York State Bar (USA). Her broad legal experience includes work in private practice, the courts, and the Legal Division of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). Anna has provided expert advice and legal counsel on maritime-related matters to the Swiss Government, NGOs, international organizations and other international fora. She has been a member of the Swiss Delegation and the Delegation of the Comité Maritime International (CMI) to the International Maritime Organization. Since 2019, Anna is sitting as Judge ad hoc for Switzerland on the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) in cases 27 and 29 (The M/T "San Padre Pio" Case, Switzerland v. Nigeria). Since 2024, she has been one of the Swiss members of the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague. Anna is the author of various monographs, notably pertaining to the law of the sea as well as international human rights law, general public international law and criminal law.
Readings
- This is the same reading as the introductory reading: Charles H Brower II, 'Arbitration' in Anne Peters (ed), Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (Oxford University Press 2007)
- V.V. Veeder, 'Inter-State Arbitration' in Thomas Schultz and Federico Ortino (eds), The Oxford Handbook of International Arbitration (Oxford University Press 2014); mandatory reading before the class.
Slides: You can find the slides of Class 6, here.
- Has there always been an obligation to settle interstate disputes peacefully, for example through arbitration? What contributions did the 1899/1907 Hague Conventions on the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes make to arbitration as a dispute settlement means?
- What are the main differences between the diplomatic-political and judicial-legal means of settling interstate disputes? And, with regard to the judicial-legal means, what are the differences between arbitration and international courts/tribunals?
- Discuss the following statement, using a real-life example: “The various means of peaceful settlement of disputes mentioned in Article 33 UN Charter are not mutually exclusive. Rather, states may rely on more than one method consecutively or in parallel in a given dispute, and there may be factual or legal linkages between these various means of dispute settlement.”
Greg Fullelove
Greg Fullelove is a Partner and Head of the International Arbitration Group at Osborne Clarke LLP. He has been counsel and advocate in numerous international commercial arbitrations both in ad hoc proceedings and institutional arbitrations, for example under the LCIA, ICC, SCC, DIS, and UNCITRAL rules. He also acts in investment treaty arbitrations, including under the ICSID rules. Greg has significant expertise of arbitration in the life sciences, energy and natural resources, digital business and financial services sectors. Greg has also been appointed as an arbitrator in LCIA, ICC and UNCITRAL proceedings and has acted as an expert witness on English arbitration law and practice in the US courts (following appointment by an energy major). He is frequently asked to speak on international arbitration at conferences and universities in the UK and abroad (including at the universities of Leiden, Oxford and Reading). Greg has been recognised as a "Global Leader" in International Arbitration by Who’s Who Legal. Legal 500 lists him as a leading practitioner in the field, and he is also recognised by Chambers and Partners. He is an editor of the Wolters Kluwer practitioner texts Arbitration in England (2013) and the forthcoming International Arbitration in England: Perspectives in Times of Change (2022).
Readings
Bilateral Agreement for the Promotion and Protection of Investments between the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and Republic of Colombia (17 March 2010); mandatory reading before the class; pay particular attention to Articles I(4), XIII(1), XIV and XV(1).
Rules
- Statute of the International Court of Justice: Art 38(1)
- Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties: Arts 1(a), 1(b), 1(f), 1(g), 24, 27-32, 59, 70 and 80
- Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts: Arts 1-5, 7, 12-15, 23, 25, 28-32, 35-36 and 38
- ICSID Convention: Arts 25 and 42
- United Nations Charter: Art 2(4)
Decisions
Ideally, you familiarize yourself with the facts of the cases below and, in addition, read the indicated pages/paragraphs.
- European American Investment Bank v. Slovakia, PCA Case No. 2010-17 (Award on Jurisdiction) (22 October 2012), paras. 69-81, 155-238, 246-280
- Anglia Auto Accessories Limited v. Czech Republic, SCC Arbitration Case V 2014/181 (Award) (10 March 2017), paras. 98-128
- LG&E Energy Corp., LG&E Capital Corp., and LG&E International, Inc. v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/1 (Decision on Liability) (3 October 2006), paras. 226-266
- Total S.A. v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/01 (Decision on Liability) (27 December 2010), paras. 345-346, 482-484
- Hulley Enterprises Limited v. Russian Federation, PCA Case No. 2005-03/AA226 (Final Award) (18 July 2014), paras. 1357-1364
- El Paso Energy International Company v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/15 (Award) (31 October 2011), paras. 613-626
- Stabil LLC and Others v. Russian Federation, PCA Case no. 2015-35 (Award on Jurisdiction) (26 June 2017), paras. 127-176; and Judgment 4A_398/2017 of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court (16 October 2018), Section 4.3 (unofficial English translation)
- Oschadbank v. Russian Federation, PCA Case No. 2016-14 (Award) (26 November 2018), paras. 196-219
- Champion Trading Company, Ameritrade International, Inc., James T. Wahba, John B. Wahba, Timothy T. Wahba v. Arab Republic of Egypt, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/9 (Decision on Jurisdiction) (21 October 2003), Sections 3.4.1 and 3.4.2
Slides: You can find the slides of Class 7, here.
- In your opinion is either mode of arbitration – institutional or ad hoc – preferable and why?
- Do you agree that arbitrations under the UNCITRAL Rules are truly ad hoc? What if they are administered by the Permanent Court of Arbitration?
- Do you believe that there should be any practical significance to the distinction between ad hoc and institutional arbitration, such as improved enforceability of awards from reputable institutions?
Aleksander Godhe
Dr Aleksander Godhe is the Michael Brown Lecturer in Construction Law and Dispute Resolution at King’s College London and a Visiting Fellow at the Stockholm Centre for Commercial Law at Stockholm University. His specialism is in dispute resolution, construction law and international economic law. Aleksander also acts as an Independent Consultant in dispute resolution and has practical experience with commercial litigation and international arbitration matters under the SIAC, DIAC, LCIA, ICC, SCC, VIAC and ICSID arbitration rules. He is a Visiting Lecturer in English Commercial Law at the British Law Centre, a charity delivering executive English law teaching across Central and Eastern Europe, and at the Africa Construction Law Training Academy. Aleksander is the Co-Chair of the International Bar Association Task Force on Contractual Adjudication and Deputy Committee Editor of the IBA Construction Law International journal. He is also a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators.
Readings
Sir Vivian Ramsey, 'Multi-Tier Dispute Resolution Clauses in Construction Contracts' in Renato Nazzini (ed.), Transnational Construction Arbitration: Key Themes in the Resolution of Construction Disputes (Informa Law from Routledge 2018); mandatory reading before the class.
Slides: You can find the slides for Class 8, here.
- What are the specific features of construction disputes that call for specific solutions?
- What are the various methods of dispute resolution in construction and how do they relate to arbitration?
- Arbitration is an expensive, inefficient and opaque dispute resolution method for construction disputes. Specialist construction courts would be a much better forum for the resolution of such disputes. Comment!
Oleg Shaulko
Oleg Shaulko is a partner in our London office, specialising in international dispute resolution, with a particular focus on international arbitration. He has acted in a broad range of arbitration proceedings under the LCIA, SIAC, UNCITRAL, and other leading arbitral rules, with matters seated in jurisdictions ranging from London, Geneva and Kyiv to Singapore and Bangkok. Oleg’s practice includes the oil and gas, commodities, and financial services sectors, and he has notable experience advising on disputes involving digital assets, including cryptocurrencies. Oleg is also regularly involved in national court proceedings related to all stages of the arbitration process, including jurisdictional challenges, applications for interim relief, and the enforcement of arbitral awards. His court experience extends across a range of jurisdictions, including England, USA, Cyprus, Switzerland, Ukraine, Russia, Singapore, Thailand, and the UAE. In addition to his arbitration practice, Oleg advises private clients and family trusts on fraud and asset recovery matters, often handling high-value, complex disputes with international or cross-border elements, including issues involving conflicts of laws. Oleg serves as the Head of the Representative Office of the Ukrainian National Bar Association in the United Kingdom, is a member of the Ukrainian Desk at Kennedys, and is a founding member of SPILKA, a Ukraine-focused legal community,
Readings
UNCITRAL WG II, 'Legal Issues Related to the Digital Economy - Dispute Resolution in the Digital Economy' (5 May 2021) UN Doc A/CN.9/1064/Add.4; mandatory reading before the class.
Rules
Lawtech UK: Digital Dispute Resolution Rules - UK Jurisidction Taskforce
Rebecca Keating, 'The Digital Dispute Resolution Rules: The Future of Digital Disputes' (2021) Butterworths Journal of International Banking and Financial Law 475-477
Slides: There are no slides for this class.
- Identify and explain three features of the UKJT Digital Dispute Resolution Rules that are specifically designed for disputes involving digital assets, smart contracts or DLT. In your answer, refer to the Rules’ approach to speed, tribunal powers, anonymity, seat or incorporation.
- Do the UKJT Digital Dispute Resolution Rules represent a genuine transformation of arbitration, or are they traditional arbitration with technological additions? Discuss with reference to on-chain enforcement, tribunal powers over digital assets, and the continuing role of English law and the seat of arbitration.
- Imagine you are advising a start-up launching a blockchain-based platform. Would you recommend incorporating the UKJT Digital Dispute Resolution Rules into its user terms or smart-contract architecture? Explain your answer by weighing speed, enforceability, technical expertise, consumer protection, fairness and reputational risk.
Gustavo Moser
Gustavo Moser is an arbitrator, consultant and legal expert with over 20 years’ experience in cross-border dispute resolution, international commercial law and intellectual property. He has advised international organisations and government agencies on law reform, intellectual property and private international law. He is qualified in Brazil, Portugal, and England and Wales, and works across both civil law and common law systems. His publications have been described as “exceptionally interesting” and “thought-provoking”.
Material
LexisNexis Access
Rules
Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, Guideline on the Use of AI in Arbitration (2025)
Silicon Valley Arbitration & Mediation Center, Guidelines on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Arbitration (2024)
Decisions
Anthony Malcolm Cork & Anor v Mark Smith, High Court of Justice, Business and Property Courts of England and Wales (Judgment) (22 May 2026)
ARIHQ v Santé Québec, Cour Supérieure (Judgment) (22 April 2026) (decision in French)
Slides: You can find the slides for Class 10, here.
- Generative AI tools may be used in international arbitration for a wide range of purposes, including legal research, drafting submissions, reviewing and organising documentary evidence, preparing bundles and chronologies, analysing factual patterns or damages models, preparing witness examinations, and conducting preliminary merits or procedural assessments. To what extent should the legal, procedural and ethical assessment of AI use depend on the specific task being performed? In your answer, identify and compare at least three different uses of AI in arbitration and explain why certain uses may raise greater concerns, and on what basis. In particular, consider whether different risks arise where AI is used merely to assist administrative tasks, to generate substantive legal analysis, or to assess the strength of legal or factual arguments. Please provide concrete examples where appropriate.
- Consider the following scenario in an international arbitration case:
(a) counsel uses generative AI to draft substantial portions of written submissions and test legal arguments;
(b) a tribunal secretary uses AI tools to summarise witness testimony and organise evidentiary materials; and
(c) an arbitrator uses AI to test the coherence of draft reasoning, identify inconsistencies in a draft award, or explore alternative formulations of the tribunal’s analysis.
Should any of these uses of AI be disclosed to the parties? If so, which uses should be disclosed, by whom, at what stage of the proceedings, and to what extent In answering, consider whether the position should differ depending on whether AI is used merely as an administrative or research aid, whether it influences substantive legal or factual analysis, or whether it risks amounting to a delegation of professional or adjudicative judgment. Would your answer differ depending on whether the user is counsel, a tribunal secretary or an arbitrator? Why? - You are acting either as counsel in a high-value international arbitration case involving extensive confidential materials and time constraints, or as an arbitrator managing a complex evidentiary record. AI tools could significantly improve efficiency in reviewing evidence, preparing chronologies and summaries, conducting legal research, drafting orders, identifying inconsistencies in factual or legal arguments, and testing strategic or procedural approaches. At the same time, recent cases have demonstrated that AI-generated legal analysis may appear convincing even where it contains serious errors, fabricated authorities or incorrect legal propositions, particularly where users rely on AI outputs without independently verifying primary sources. How would you determine which tasks may appropriately be assisted by AI, which tasks should remain subject to human judgment, and what safeguards, verification measures or disclosure obligations should apply before relying on AI-generated or AI-assisted work product in the proceedings? In your answer, reflect on whether different standards should apply to junior and senior lawyers, counsel, tribunal secretaries and arbitrators, and explain why.
Kevin Nash
Kevin Nash is the Director General of the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA). The Director General fulfils the role of Chief Executive Officer, with day-to-day responsibility for the conduct of the business of the LCIA, serves as the principal point of contact between the institution and its Board and Court, and represents the LCIA on the international stage. Kevin joined the LCIA after 13 years in Singapore where he served as the Registrar of the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC). In this capacity, Kevin led the 25-member Secretariat in the administration of thousands of international cases under all versions of the SIAC Rules and the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules. As Registrar, Kevin advised the President and the SIAC Court of Arbitration, and took decisions on, procedural applications under the SIAC Rules, the appointment of arbitrators, and he was responsible for the review and approval of all awards issued in SIAC arbitrations. Kevin also led the drafting on the SIAC Rules 2016, SIAC Investment Arbitration Rules 2017, and SIAC Rules 2025. Recognised for being ‘in a league of his own’ who ‘knows everything there is to know about international arbitration’ Kevin is listed by Who’s Who Legal as a Global Leader and a National Leader for Singapore and the United Kingdom. Peers and clients have described him as a ‘rock star of arbitration’ who is ‘smart and practical’ and ‘willing to get his hands dirty and do the hard work’. Kevin is an active participant at UNCITRAL Working Group II (Dispute Settlement) and UNCITRAL Working Group III (ISDS) and frequently speaks, lectures and conducts training on contemporary issues in arbitration. Kevin holds a BA from Mount Allison University and a JD from Osgoode Hall Law School. He worked at one of Canada’s prominent ‘Seven Sister’ law firms and then went on to study an LLM in International Commercial Arbitration at Stockholm University where he was awarded Outstanding Alumnus in 2023. Kevin is qualified as a Barrister and Solicitor with the Law Society of Ontario. He speaks English and French.
Readings
LCIA Costs and Duration Analysis - 2024; mandatory reading before the class.
Rules
LCIA Rules Effective 1 Oct 2020 With Schedule of Costs 1 Dec 2023
Slides: You can find the slides for Class 11, here.
- What available procedures in the LCIA Rules 2020, in your opinion, greatly contribute to procedural efficiency?
- Under the LCIA Rules 2020, in what circumstances the LCIA Court may order consolidation of multiple arbitrations?
- Why LCIA arbitration may be considered more costs effective, as revealed in its Costs and Duration Analysis, in arbitrations involving relatively large amount in dispute?
Kate Cervantes-Knox
Kate Cervantes-Knox is an independent arbitrator based in London, with extensive experience in complex international commercial and investment treaty arbitrations. For over 20 years Kate specialised in international arbitration in two leading global law firms, Linklaters and DLA Piper (12 years as a partner). She established her own practice as an independent arbitrator in 2023. Kate has been included in Chambers & Partners’ UK 2026 Guide to Arbitrators (Band 1) and has been recognised as a Thought Leader by the Lexology Index: Arbitration (2026) and Who’s Who Legal: Arbitration (2025, 2024, 2023). She has also been recognised as a leading individual for international arbitration by the Legal 500 and features in Best Lawyers (International Arbitration) 2024 and the Legal 500 Private Practice Powerlist 2023. Kate is a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators and a Solicitor of the Supreme Court of England and Wales with Higher Rights of Audience. She sits on the Board of Directors of the LCIA and currently serves as President of the LCIA European Users’ Council. In addition, she is a Visiting Professor at the University of Law, London.
Readings
Franz Schwarz, 'Opening Submissions' in Global Arbitration Review, The Guide to Advocacy (7th edition, 2026).
Slides: You can find the slides of Class 12, here.
Galina Borshevskaya
Galina is a Senior Associate in Osborne Clarke's Commercial Disputes Team. Galina's diverse practice covers both commercial and investment arbitration as well as litigation in English courts. Galina has represented clients in complex commercial, contractual and corporate disputes in energy, infrastructure, transportation and retail sectors in arbitrations under the rules of all major institutions, including ICSID, LCIA, ICC and SCC and in ad hoc proceedings under the UNCITRAL Rules. Galina currently acts as a tribunal secretary in an LCIA arbitration. Galina is actively involved in pro bono, where she uses her legal skills and knowledge to help children with special educational needs and their parents secure places in schools that meet their needs.
Arif Ali
Prof. Arif Hyder Ali is the founder of AHALI, a boutique dispute resolution-focused law firm based in Washington, D.C. and London. For over three decades, Mr. Ali has served as an arbitrator and represented parties in disputes in investor-state, commercial, and construction arbitrations under all the major arbitral regimes and the laws of over 50 civil and common law jurisdictions, as well as Islamic law and public international law. Prior to establishing AHALI, Mr. Ali headed the international arbitration practices at three Am Law 100 firms, most recently serving as the global co-chair of Dechert LLP’s International Arbitration Practice Group. In addition to publishing multiple books as lead author and more than 50 articles, Mr. Ali has held positions at leading academic institutions (Georgetown University Law Center, University of Dundee’s Centre for Energy, Mineral Law, and Policy) as an adjunct law professor, honorary lecturer and global faculty member.
Emilia Onyema
Professor Emilia Onyema is Professor of International Commercial Law at SOAS University of London and a leading expert in international arbitration, particularly in relation to Africa. Qualified in Nigeria and as a solicitor in England & Wales, she combines academic work with extensive experience as arbitrator, counsel and expert witness in international disputes. Professor Onyema is widely recognised for her work promoting arbitration in Africa. She convenes the SOAS Arbitration in Africa conference series, leads the SOAS Arbitration in Africa survey project, and co-authored the African Promise initiative, which promotes greater representation of African arbitrators in international proceedings. She also founded the Arbitration Fund for African Students (AFAS). She has published extensively on international commercial and investment arbitration and regularly speaks on issues relating to arbitration, diversity, and legal education.
Traditionally, our understanding is that the arbitrator exercises independent judgment to decide the dispute submitted to them. This, the arbitrator does through identifying the relevant facts and law to apply. This is a fundamental distinguishing factor of the arbitrator which impacts the skills appointors look for in individuals they appoint. “Individuals” connote human beings who exercise these faculties to perform the role. Now we have machines and software who may be joining this category of “individuals” and this is changing our understanding of who the arbitrator can/should be, the skills they should possess and what they do in the arbitration process. Professor Onyema will explore these issues in her keynote, particularly in the context of the expectations of the disputants.
All online participants are requested to register in advance for the keynote lecture under the following link.
You find the slides of the Closing Keynote here (will be uploaded after the keynote).
Aims of the Reflective Journal
- The Reflective Journal helps you understand and remember key issues and provides you the chance to record your developing understanding and ideas about the various topic dealt with during the London Summer Arbitration School.
- The journal will be assessed to make sure it demonstrates substantive reflective comments on the topics covered, with an analysis and evaluation of the respective concepts.
- There will be no grade for the journal, just pass or fail.
Requirement for being awarded the Certificate of Completion:
- Timely submission of a reflective journal that respects the instructions listed in the template for the Reflective Journal (see below) is a prerequisite for being awarded the Certificate of Completion of the London Summer Arbitration School on Friday, 19 June 2026.
- Late submissions cannot be taken into account.
Template and Instructions:
- Please use this template for your Reflective Journal.
- On the first page of the template, you find all the instructions concerning the Reflective Journal.
Upload
- Deadline: You must upload your Reflective Journal no later than Thursday, 18 June 2025, 17:30 BST.
- Upload link: Please click here to start the process. Please note that before being able to upload your journal, you need to complete the feedback form. After completion of the feedback form, the link to upload the journal will appear.
- Labeling and format: Please name your file "Last name_Reflective Journal LSAS 2026" (example: "Petrig_Reflective Journal LSAS 2026") and upload it in Word format.
- Access to the journal: Please note that only the organizers (but not the other participants) can see your Reflective Journal.
- Certificates of Completion: You can download your Certificate of Completion here (link will be accessible shortly after the hand over of the certificates).
- Diploma in International Arbitration: Participants who have successfully completed the Basel Winter Arbitration School (BWAS) and the London Summer Arbitration School (LSAS) can download their Diploma in International Arbitration (link will be accessible shortly after the hand over of the diplomas).
Please note that we are only handing out paper certificates/diplomas to those attending the Closing Ceremony; we will not send any certificates/diplomas by post.
You find pictures of the LSAS 2026 here.