1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |The Eighteenth Annual Investment Treaty Arbitration Conference: A Debate & Discussion

The Eighteenth Annual Investment Treaty Arbitration Conference: A Debate & Discussion

Event | 11.18.24, 9:00 AM EST - 5:00 PM EST | CLE Offered

Address

Crowell & Moring LLP - New York Office
Two Manhattan West,
375 9th Ave,
New York, NY 10001

Register Here

JURIS Conferences is very excited to present this upcoming program, hosted for the first time in New York City at the new office location of Crowell & Moring. This four-panel program will feature leading arbitration practitioners and scholars who will tackle important questions of international investment law and arbitration.

Eight rising superstars from the global arbitration community will present their argument papers, which will then be debated by panels of experienced professionals. The program will include notable figures in the field of arbitration, including Crowell & Moring's own Ian Laird, Irina Goga, and Ashley Riveira:

  • Ian Laird
    Moderator of Panel 1:
    True or false: The recent decision of the Paris Court of Appeal, in DIT v. Port Autonome de Douala, calls into question the continuing relevance of the IBA Rules on Conflict of Interest?
  • Ashley Riveira
    Panelist of Panel 1:
    True or false: The recent decision of the Paris Court of Appeal, in DIT v. Port Autonome de Douala, calls into question the continuing relevance of the IBA Rules on Conflict of Interest?
  • Irina Goga
    Panelist of Panel 3:
    Are sovereign wealth fund "investors" protected by investor-state arbitration? Should they be?

For more information, please visit these areas: International Dispute Resolution, International Arbitration, Litigation and Trial

Participants

Insights

Event | 02.20.25

Has the Buss Stopped? Recoupment Today

Has the Buss Stopped? Recoupment Today: In 1997, the California Supreme Court decided Buss v. Superior Court. In Buss, the court concluded that a liability insurer that defended a mixed action could seek reimbursement from the insured for the defense costs associated with the claims that were not even potentially covered. Since then, numerous courts have held that insurers are entitled to recoup their defense costs associated with uncovered claims or causes of action. On the other hand, a significant number of courts have rejected insurers’ right to recoupment, at least in the absence of a policy provision granting the insurer that right. Some commentators have even suggested that the current judicial trend might be away from permitting insurers to recoup their defense costs. Is that correct? Has the Buss stopped? This panel of coverage experts will analyze insurers’ claimed right to recoupment today, and offer their perspectives on what the law on recoupment should perhaps be and might be in the future.

View All Insights