header-logo header-logo

27 October 2021
Issue: 7954 / Categories: Legal News , Climate change litigation , Profession , Arbitration
printer mail-detail

Arbitration at COP26?

Adoption of the ‘arbitration annex’ at COP26, in Glasgow next week, would encourage states to act on their climate and environmental obligations, according to lawyers
COP26 is the 26th meeting of parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

Writing in a paper for LexisNexis, ‘COP26―the road to net zero’, Pinsent Masons partner Pamela McDonald said she hoped there would be discussion on arbitration at the conference.

The Paris Agreement set emissions targets but ‘implementation and enforcement mechanisms under both the agreement and the UNFCCC are either absent or weak’, she wrote. While the Paris Agreement allowed states to declare they accepted arbitration in accordance with procedures in an ‘annex on arbitration’, adoption of the annex ‘would provide a vital means of ensuring the Paris Agreement is respected’.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley strengthens family law team

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Construction lawyer returns to Ward Hadaway in Teesside role

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird Bird hires leading legal transformation expert

NEWS
Legal aid deserts leave almost one in four without adequate access to justice
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners

Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.

How forcefully can a litigant criticise a public authority before robust advocacy crosses the line into unreasonable conduct? 
back-to-top-scroll