International Arbitration, Natural Resources, and Climate Change
Publications
The Challenges of Resolving International Non-Navigable Water Disputes
Matthew E. Draper, ABA SEER Alternative Dispute Resolution Newsletter, Vol 12. No. 1, January 2016
A review of the enforcement mechanisms applicable to international non-navigable water disputes, including those provided in the UN Watercourses Convention, followed by a proposal for generating more widespread availability of binding dispute resolution.
Resolving Water Disputes: Compacts and the U.S. Supreme Court
Matthew E. Draper, June 11, 2015
An overview of the various methods by which transborder water disputes are resolved between states in the United States -- including through litigation, Congressional acts, and interstate compacts -- presented to the American Bar Association's Section on the Environment, Energy and Resources' Alternative Dispute Resolution and Water committees.
New UN Watercourses Convention Enters Into Force: Treaty Provides Inter-State Arbitration and Private Rights of Action for Transboundary Water Disputes
Matthew E. Draper, August 18, 2014
An analysis of the first global treaty to govern transboundary water use and establish mechanisms for resolving international water disputes. Notably, the Watercourses Convention creates a right for companies and individuals to enjoy equal access to foreign States’ courts and administrative proceedings to redress transboundary water pollution, diversion, and other water-related harms.
ICC Commission Report: States, State Entities & ICC Arbitration
International Chamber of Commerce, 2012
Matthew E. Draper served as a member of the ICC Task Force for States, State Entities and ICC Arbitration. The report, published by the ICC, provides recommendations regarding changes to the internationa arbitration rules of the ICC.
For more information about the ICC Task Force, click here.
Hong Kong Appellate Court Upholds Arbitral Award Despite Claim of Apparent Bias During “Med –Arb”
Matthew E. Draper, New York Dispute Resolution Lawyer, Spring 2012, Vol. 5, No. 1.
An analysis of the controversial decision of the Hong Kong Court of Appeals in Gao Haiyan and Xie Heping v. Keeneye Holdings and another CACV 79/2011.