arbitration written assignment

prepared to discuss the answers to each of these questions in class next week (Oct.
6). Written responses to the questions will be due on TWEN by 5 pm on October 9, 2015.
This assignment is worth 7 points, or 7% of your grade for the course. Please write no more
than 4 pages with 1.5 spacing between lines.
You represent Turnkey International, a general contractor in an arbitration involving a major
construction dispute with the Republic of Kardashia. Kardashia retained Turnkey to build the
Kardashia North West International Airport in Kimzmir, Kardashia. The contract contained an
arbitration provision. Kardashia has adopted the Model Law.
In accordance with a provision in the contract, Turnkey and Kardashia each unilaterally
appointed an arbitrator, and those two arbitrators picked a third arbitrator as chair. The
parties have just announced their list of witnesses for the hearing, and you have heard from
two different sources that one of the expert witnesses for Kardashia (that is, an expert of the
owner) has recently done extensive consulting work with the arbitrator selected by
Kardashia, and has also has also worked as a consultant to the chair and his law firm. Neither
the Kardashian arbitrator nor the chair has thus far made disclosures regarding the matter,
but you are very, very concerned about those arbitrators’ ability to render an impartial
decision under the circumstances.
Question 1. Assume the arbitration hearings are scheduled to begin soon. What are your
courses of action? Should you go to court for immediate relief? Ask the two arbitrators to
resign? Tell the arbitrator you appointed to resign in protest? Appeal to the entire panel for
relief through majority decision? Something else? Does it make a difference if the applicable
rules are the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules, with the ICC as appointing authority? Please
explain.
Question 2. What difference, if any, would it make if you did not discover the undisclosed
relationships until after the award? Could you sue the arbitrators, or the appointing
authority under the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules, or do something else? Would it make any
difference if the ICC Rules (and not the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules) were the applicable rule?
What is your likely option at this point?
Question 3. If the building project and the seat of arbitration are in the United States and the
lCDR Rules (and not the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules) apply, how (if at all) would that change
your answers to (B)?