Juliet Blanch

Arbitration Chambers

Juliet Blanch is a full time arbitrator having previously chaired the international dispute resolution practice at Weil, Gotshal & Manges. She has over 30 years’ experience in the arbitration of both international commercial and investment treaty disputes with a particular focus on energy and infrastructure, mining, commodities, telecommunications, pharmaceutical, hospitality, maritime and shareholder disputes. Juliet has acted as lead Counsel and/or sat as arbitrator in arbitrations held under HKIAC, ICC, ICSID, LCIA, LMAA, SCC, SIAC, UNCITRAL and other rules and which have been seated in a variety of jurisdictions including London, Hong Kong, Paris, Singapore, Stockholm, Washington DC and Zurich.

Elie Kleiman

Jones Day

Elie Kleiman has 30 years of experience in dispute resolution, with a significant focus on cross-border litigation, international arbitration, and crisis management. He also has experience in competition, intellectual property, bankruptcy, and white collar crime. He has advised large French and international companies as lead counsel in many high-profile disputes involving complex, business-sensitive issues, bringing many of the disputes to an optimal conclusion, either in court, through arbitration, or through imaginative settlement solutions.


Marie Danis

August Debouzy

John Fellas

Hughes Hubbard & Reed

Gaëlle Filhol

Betto Seraglini

Jean-Yves Garaud

Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton

Judge Dominique Hascher

Supreme Judicial Court of France

Charles Kaplan

Orrick Rambaud Martel

Sam Karim QC

Kings Chambers

Kathryn Khamsi

Three Crowns

Antoine Kirry

Debevoise & Plimpton

Timothy Mayer


Iain McKenny

Profile Investment

Yasmin Mohammad

Vannin Capital

Kathleen Paisley


George Spalton

4 New Square

Thierry Tomasi

Herbert Smith Freehills

Jackie van Haersolte-van Hof

London Court of International Arbitration

Hafez Virjee

Delos Dispute Resolution


9.00: Welcome coffee and registration

9.30: Chairs’ opening remarks

Juliet Blanch, Arbitration Chambers
Elie Kleiman, Jones Day

9.40: Session one: A 360-degree view on arbitral institutions and their war on time and cost

Arbitral institutions around the world have spent the past decade responding to concerns about time and cost. But, have they got on top of the complaints? Or is the medicine at times worse than the disease? Several of the amendments introduced, particularly those aimed at arbitrators are proving divisive.

In this panel speakers from a range of perspectives will discuss the role institutions play in international arbitration; whom they serve; and are they worth the fees? Who sits at the top of the international arbitration food chain - institutions or arbitrators – and has the balance of power shifted in recent times?

Questions the panel are expected to discuss include:

  • What value are institutions adding?
  • Why is ad hoc arbitration not more popular, even in safe seats?
  • What are the initiatives that really seem to improve efficiency and delivery of results?
  • Are arbitrators resisting some of the institutions’ changes?
  • Is leaner, quicker and cheaper arbitration really what users want? Is it “better”?

Juliet Blanch, Arbitration Chambers 

Charles Kaplan, Orrick Rambaud Martel
Jackie van Haersolte-van Hof, London Court of International Arbitration
Hafez Virjee, Delos Dispute Resolution

10.55: Coffee break

11.30: Session two: The GAR Live Question Time: funding and its impact on the arbitration firm’s business model

One of the most interesting shifts in IA over the past five years has been in received wisdom on third party funding. Once viewed with suspicion, it is now viewed, by some, as almost the salvation of the practice area, as arbitration teams struggle to match the profitability of other practice areas within international firms. Third-party funders are literate clients who understand what value is and will pay for it.

Against this backdrop, our esteemed panel will discuss questions submitted by the audience, which may include:

  • How widely is third party funding used?
  • What are the success rates and do they justify the returns being sought?
  • To what extent do funders offer different terms? Is it time to develop some standard terms?
  • Have any of the original concerns about funding proved legitimate?
  • Are there any classes of case for which it is still too difficult to get funding?
  • How is funding affecting the business model of different IA firms? Is its arrival a positive or a negative?
  • Where do things go next? What new products or business models are in the pipeline? How far is it possible to turn arbitration claims, or awards, into financial products?
  • How does the use of third-party funding differ in France?

Juliet Blanch, Arbitration Chambers 

Timothy Mayer, Therium
Iain McKenny, Profile Investment 
Yasmin Mohammad, Vannin Capital
Kathleen Paisley, Ambos Law

12.45: Networking lunch

13.45: Session three: Challenges to arbitrators – getting the balance right

French courts have adopted a broader definition of “independent” when assessing challenges to arbitrators than other jurisdictions. Is the French approach what users want? Or does it go too far and introduce inefficiency, in the form of delays and lawsuits against arbitrators and institutions?

In this session, the panel will discuss the state of play when it comes to challenges in Paris versus how they are dealt with in other seats. Who has the balance right?

Questions they are expected to discuss include:

  • Has the French stance tipped too much toward an un-reachable standard of purity?
  • Should the disclosure practices of other arbitrators or decisions on challenges rendered by arbitral institutions be given weight before state courts?  
  • Are courts sufficiently informed of wider international arbitration market practice outside their own jurisdiction?
  • What should the standard be? How much should be disclosed?
  • Are arbitrators expected to delete their LinkedIn accounts or live like hermits?

Elie Kleiman, Jones Day

Jean-Yves Garaud, Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton
Judge Dominique Hascher, Supreme Judicial Court of France
Antoine Kirry, Debevoise & Plimpton
George Spalton, 4 New Square
Thierry Tomasi, Herbert Smith Freehills 

15.00: Coffee break

15.30: Session four: The GAR Live Inquisition – how can IA remain at the forefront of international advocacy?

In this session, our panel of inquisitors will replicate a US senate committee hearing and “grill” a succession of witnesses on whether IA represents the best vehicle for international disputes. Some areas they are expected to cover are:

  • What techniques has IA given the world that are now being adopted by international courts and generally taken as the right way to do things?
  • Will any of IA’s more recent innovations also stand the test of time?  
  • The effect of widespread arbitration on development of commercial law: does it kill development? Can that be avoided?
  • The implied duty of confidentiality – should opt-in be made the norm?
  • Will international commercial courts be effective in reducing costs?
  • What will be the effect of sanctions?
  • Will GDPR be the death knell of IA?

Elie Kleiman, Jones Day

John Fellas, Hughes Hubbard & Reed 
Gaëlle Filhol, Betto Seraglini

Marie Danis, August Debouzy
Sam Karim QC, Kings Chambers
Kathryn Khamsi, Three Crowns

16.45: Chairs’ closing remarks

Juliet Blanch, Arbitration Chambers
Elie Kleiman, Jones Day

16:55 onwards: All delegates are invited to attend a drinks reception kindly hosted by Orrick Rambaud Martel


31, Avenue Pierre 1er de Serbie, Paris, 75061 Cedex 16, France

Ticket Prices

Private Practitioner
Type Price Until
Super Early €800 19 Oct 2018
Early €950 16 Nov 2018
Standard €1,100 28 Nov 2018


Complimentary In-house/governmental registration available