Thursday, 14 June 2018, London, United Kingdom

E-mail Tel: +44 20 3780 4137


Kate Davies

Allen & Overy

Kate is a Partner in Allen & Overy’s International Arbitration Group, and has extensive expertise in both international commercial and investment treaty arbitration.

James Loftis

Vinson & Elkins

James heads our International Dispute Resolution practice, and focuses his practice on the arbitration and litigation of international commercial and investor-state disputes, and counseling in matters involving public international law and treaties. He acts both as counsel and as arbitrator.

2017 Programme

8.30: Welcome coffee and registration

9.00: Chairs’ welcome

Juliet Blanch, Arbitration Chambers, Hong Kong & London
Stephen Jagusch QC, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan

9.10: Keynote speech: Wim Thomas, Chief Energy Advisor, Shell

"A better life with a healthy planet - Pathways to net-zero emissions"

9.40: Session one: Scene setting: Energy Transitions - where, when, how?

All of a sudden the world looks a rather different place. Or does it? Will the various ‘seismic’ events have that much of an effect on the energy industry, and in particular, disputes? Panellists will be asked to predict what 2017 and 2018 hold in store when it comes to the types of energy disputes that will arise.

How will the envisaged (speed of) energy transitions affect energy disputes?

Amongst Q&A, a discussion could develop around:

  • Is contract sanctity defensible in light of the regulatory changes enforced unevenly across sectors and regions?
  • Will climate change litigation take off, and if so in which form? Who would be most at risk and how best to mitigate?
  • Are global political developments changing the nature of disputes and the way resolution is sought?
  • In what way is technology changing the nature of arbitration?

Juliet Blanch, Arbitration Chambers, Hong Kong & London

Gordon Kaiser, JAMS
Michelle Macphee, Managing Counsel, Dispute Resolution Team, BP
Michael O'Kane, Peters & Peters
Richard Power, Clyde & Co

10.45: Coffee break

11.15: Session two: International boundary disputes and energy related natural resources

Climate change and the implementation of the Paris Agreement will inevitably increase commercial and treaty disputes. The panel will discuss the following predictions:

  • Energy transition from fossil fuels to renewables will require states and state entities to reconsider and possibly recalibrate existing license, concession and production sharing agreements, leading to claims by investors;
  • Demand for new and relatively rare earth minerals required for renewables (including photovoltaic panels and wind turbine magnetic parts) will drive a new natural resources market, leading to claims by investors and states and people with the rights to those resources;
  • Various renewable schemes pursuant to the UNFCCC, e.g. carbon tax credit trading, will lead to new contracts and new commercial disputes;
  • Economic stability of oil producing countries will alter and potentially exacerbate political instability and border disputes and human rights claims;
  • Population displacement caused by climate change will further exacerbate political instability and border disputes and human rights claims;
  • Increased liability and accountability for failure to meet emissions targets pursuant to the Paris Agreement will lead to state disputes under the Agreement or private law/constitutional claims by activist groups (e.g. Urgenda)

Where should this myriad of climate change related disputes be heard? Should there be a separate tribunal established to hear all forms of disputes relating to climate change?

Wendy Miles QC, Debevoise & Plimpton

Youseph Farah, Senior Lecturer in Commercial Law, School of Law, University of East Anglia
Monica Feria-Tinta, 20 Essex Street
Judith Levine, Senior Legal Counsel, Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA)

12.30: Networking lunch

14.00: Session three: Damages – A triangular discussion

1) Observation: In Investor-State cases, only 25% to 30% of damages being claimed are awarded; energy disputes make up a large proportion of these cases

2) Examination: How can it be that experts who support damages calculations find that only a quarter of what they are saying is being awarded?

3) The experts’ view: What’s going wrong?

Amongst other things, the panel will present:

  • A diagnosis – do the statistics bear out the proposition?
  • Possible explanations – moral hazard on the part of experts or counsel? Insufficiently brave arbitrators?
  • A prescription – does all of this matter? Do large claims lead to over-working cases and inflated legal fees?  What are the possible solutions?

Stephen Jagusch QC, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan

Richard Edwards, Senior Managing DirectorFTI Consulting
Mark Beeley, Vinson & Elkins
Siegfried Elsing, Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe
Boaz Moselle, Cornerstone Research
Benard Preziosi Jr., Curtis, Mallet-Prevost, Colt & Mosle

15.15: Coffee break

15.45: Session four: The GAR Live Debate

Motion: “This house believes that there’s no law in gas pricing arbitration”

Shai Wade, Stephenson Harwood

Paul Griffin, White & Case
Ben Holland, Squire Patton Boggs
Mark Levy, Allen & Overy
Gisele Stephens-Chu, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer

Sophie Nappert, 3 Verulam Buildings
James Spigelman QC, Independent Arbitrator
Baiju Vasani, Jones Day

17.00: Chairs’ closing remarks

Juliet Blanch, Arbitration Chambers, Hong Kong & London
Stephen Jagusch QC, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan

17.15 onwards: All delegates are invited to attend a drinks reception kindly hosted by Clyde & Co

London, United Kingdom


  • "Very good. Excellent topics which raise conversations that require cross-sector debate" Youseph Farah, University of East Anglia

  • "Excellent moderators for all sessions. Human rights and the debate session were highlights"

  • "Broad range of topics with well representing panelists" Valery Knyazev, Haberman Illet