Conference programme

In the course of the arbitration, the tribunal may discover that criminal offences such as bribery, corruption and money laundering might have been committed. What should the tribunal do in that situation? What are the applicable laws at play? Does the tribunal have a duty to investigate in order to ascertain whether these criminal offences have been committed and, if so, what is the applicable standard of proof? Does the tribunal have a duty to report these criminal offences to the authorities, and if so, which authorities? What happens if the tribunal fails to report these offences to the authorities? Does the approach differ depending on the parties, as well as whether this is a commercial or investment arbitration? The panel will discuss these perplexing issues at the session.

How is it that the ultra-favourite basketball team of the tournament lost over the least favourite one? What happened to this promising young tennis player that suddenly surrendered one entire set, then the match, to a second- rate player almost no one bet on? The reason might well lie in the ultimate manipulation of the sport business: match fixing and its string of related criminal offences. But how can the sport institutions evidence this? Do the arbitral tribunals have the capability to find out the truth? Will the prosecutors and police help by sharing their own findings? Can modern technology be of any assistance? How can match fixing be prevented? Are the sanctions adapted to the seriousness of a worldwide threat over the sport, its business, its image and its spirit? With trained experts from all over the world, the panel will discuss the path to a more ethical competition.

Arbitration cases and due diligence can have different connections, with criminal law implications on the background. Sometimes arbitral tribunals determine whether an investor has exercised due diligence in light of certain circumstances, that may have criminal relevance. Sometimes it is the other way round: before performing a transaction, the companies involved carry out a due diligence, which leads to the discovery of warning signs from a criminal law perspective and, consequently, to a claim to be managed through an arbitration. Time is often a key factor: red flags in terms of prevention or prosecution of potential frauds shall be taken into account within proper timeframes for both criminal and arbitration cases. How all these tricky situations can be properly faced from both an arbitration and a criminal law perspective?

The panel will discuss matters related to sham arbitration organizations, fraudulent arbitrations and arbitral awards based on fraudulent evidence (eg. deepfake and other types).

The panel will discuss different issues arising from the intersection between criminal proceedings (investigation, prosecution, trial) and commercial or investments arbitrations. Should arbitrators stay arbitrations pending the outcome of criminal proceedings? How should they treat for purposes of the arbitration the evidence given and the result that may issue in criminal proceedings? How should they deal with a request to share outside of the arbitration the information gathered in the arbitration? Do criminal investigations deserve a different treatment in investment arbitrations when the state is relying upon an investigation as a defence?

This panel will discuss issues such as: (1) the use of criminal law as a tactic to disrupt arbitral proceedings and to vacate awards; (2) attacks to arbitrators, to the proceedings and other issues raised as grounds to challenge unfavourable awards; (3) criminal behaviour that may jeopardise the arbitration; and (4) the consequences of the annulment of awards by fraud.