In April 2020, the 27th Annual Willem C. Vis International Commercial Arbitration Moot was concluded successfully – an outcome that only weeks before did not seem attainable in the face of the COVID-19 crisis.
Shortly after the necessary cancellation of the in-person oral hearings in Vienna at the end of March 2020, the Vienna Vis Moot Directors took the decision to conduct the oral part of the competition virtually – what at first seemed a “mission impossible” in the short period of time before the start of the competition.
Within only 6 weeks, this year’s Vienna Vis Moot became the center stage for putting digitalization and its potential use for virtual oral hearings in arbitration to the test by thousands of users.
Being the first event of its kind and size, the Virtual Vienna Vis Moot exposed not only the organisers to new challenges but also the students, arbitrators, coaches – and IT professionals. Over a period of six days, 560 hearings were conducted remotely, involving more than 3,500 participants from 85 countries. For a couple of days, the Vis Moot turned into what could be referred to as a “virtual hearing boot camp” or the largest worldwide “Virtual Hearing Centre”.
The Virtual Vienna Vis Moot gave the arbitration community the unique opportunity to test virtual hearings, which was for many of the arbitrators a totally new experience. What lessons could be learned? Most importantly, internet connections and bandwidth are differing in quality depending on where you are in the world. There are certainly some countries where the internet connections are not sufficiently reliable to easily replace an in-person hearing. The technical aspects challenged many of the participants. Getting a hearing up and running took more time than one would expect, in particular until everybody is settled and has sufficient audio and visual presence. Being well-acquainted with the communications system and having read the manual was important for smooth operations.
Each hearing was supported by a virtual room manager who was available to troubleshoot and provide guidance to participants on technical issues during the hearing. Overall, a majority of the hearings went very well with the technical support of the virtual room managers.
Dana MacGrath, ArbitralWomen President and Omni Bridgeway Investment Manager and Legal Counsel commented, “The hearing in which I served as arbitrator went very smoothly. While there were a few technical glitches at the start due to limited bandwidth of one of the arbitrators, once that was addressed with the assistance of the virtual room manager, the hearing went on without incident. The level of pleading was excellent, and shortly into the hearing I was barely aware that it was a virtual as opposed to in-person pleading. At the close of the hearing, the tribunal was able to deliberate in a private breakout room. Overall, it was very professional.”
Virtual hearings definitely require more prearrangements and preliminary deliberations of arbitrators and counsel than hearings in person. Simply because spontaneous interactions are limited including communications with colleagues, co-counsel or co-arbitrators. They also require a lot more concentration to monitor the screen with a lot of participants while still handling the substance of the dispute itself.
One of the most important aspects to keep in mind when taking virtual arbitration hearings into the “real world” is to ensure control over the different participants and their environments: With current systems, it is very hard to assess whether someone is getting unauthorized outside support or the hearing is recorded without permission.
The experience in the 27th Virtual Vienna Vis Moot showed that the technical developments are heading in the right direction and that the arbitration community is ready to take the next step toward virtual hearings as a real alternative to hearings in person. There is certainly still room for market improvements, especially in complex and document heavy arbitration, and not all online platforms provide the necessary features that are required for arbitration hearings.
The 27th Virtual Vienna Vis Moot has taken a first step to train thousands of participants in the conduct of virtual hearings and helped students to understand this as an option. What was greeted partly with scepticism and concern turned out to become a wonderful learning experience.
In terms of diversity, the trend of the last years continued and the Moot had a slight majority of 55% of all students that were female. This result fits seamlessly into the line of encouraging results that can be taken out of this exceptional Vienna Vis Moot year.
Submitted by ArbitralWomen Member Patrizia Netal, KNOETZL, Vis Moot Director
You can delete your CV file if you do not want it to be accessible on the site.
Policy on Funding Moot Competition Teams
Each year ArbitralWomen provides support to a number of Teams who participate in dispute resolution competitions, such as the Vis or Vis East International Arbitration Moot by covering their registration fee.
Following are the conditions for the funding:
Any qualified team requesting financial assistance must complete an application form providing details of the teams, resources, and the reason for the requested assistance. The application form is available on the website, and may be amended from time to time as the Board deems appropriate.
The Board, through its Moot Bursary Committee, shall consider all applications received and decide which team(s) shall be supported through payment of its(their) registration fee to compete. In general, teams selected will be from different countries. Applications filed after the deadline will be disregarded.
Criteria of selection:
The team must reflect ArbitralWomen's mission of promoting the participation of women in dispute resolution, i.e. at least half of the members of a team must be women.
The team must demonstrate the need for financial assistance.
Priority will be given to teams:
who have not previously participated, and whose school has not previously participated;
who have no support from their universities or no coach;
who come from developing countries or jurisdictions which, in the sole discretion of the Board, are in the greatest need of support for the advancement of women in dispute resolution;
of smaller number of students composing the team (for example 4 students as opposed to 8).
An all-female team may be awarded the ArbitralWomen President’s Bursary if the other requirements are met.
Nothing in this Policy prevents a team, which has already received funding in one year, from applying in future years. The Board shall treat each application on its merits and in relation to other applications received for that particular year.
The Board shall effect payment to the final payee rather than directly to the team. In the event the team for any reason cannot participate, the Board at its sole option may request a refund from the organising authority, may request the organising authority to apply the funds to assist another team in that year, or may request that the funds be used to pay for another team in the following year.
Funding will, in the first instance, be sought from external sponsors, who shall be identified and introduced to the sponsored team(s). Further funding by ArbitralWomen itself in any given year will be contingent upon the existence and maintenance of sufficient funds in the account of ArbitralWomen. Each year, the Board will decide the number of awards to be given in that year. Nothing in this Policy obliges the Board to provide funding in any given year.
Although the ArbitralWomen Moot Bursaries are limited to payment of the registration fee, as mentioned above, there is nothing to prevent the chosen sponsors from providing additional assistance to the teams assigned as their "fundee", but any such arrangement will be made directly between the sponsor and the applicable team.