18 July, 2017
Stephenson Harwood’s international arbitration practice has recently been strengthened in Asia by the addition of Timothy Cooke, a partner in our Singapore office. Timothy has been in practice for 17 years and is listed by Who’s Who Legal (2017) as a Future Leader in Arbitration as well as in other legal directories, among other accolades. He is the author of a forthcoming international arbitration title to be published by Sweet & Maxwell in early 2018. We spoke with Timothy to gain an understanding of his practice and his experience of arbitration in Singapore.
Tell us a bit about yourself and your practice.
I qualified as a barrister in England in 2000. I started out as a commercial litigator in the county courts in England and the High Court in London. An opportunity then arose to develop my practice in the Cayman Islands and the British Virgin Islands. Better still, the weather was a big improvement – apart from the odd hurricane. Along the way, I had met my wife, who had grown up in Singapore. We decided to settle there, and made the move in 2006. Since then, I have been practising commercial arbitration in a range of sectors, but especially in oil and gas, power (fossil fuel and renewables), infrastructure and other investment disputes mostly focused in Southeast Asia.
How did you first get in to international arbitration?
The first arbitration I was involved with concerned a telecommunications dispute between parties based in the Middle East. I was thrust into a world of multiple applicable laws, a dispute exacerbated by cultural clashes, and a procedural framework that was looser than the rules of court to which I was accustomed. At around the same time, I became involved in a large arbitration involving the conversion of a bulk carrier to a state-of-the- part pipe-laying vessel – the Solitaire – which was my first exposure to the complexities of preparing a very large dispute as part of a sizeable legal and expert team. Both were formative learning experiences.
Can you share some highlights of cases you have been involved in?
The details of most of the arbitrations I have been involved in are protected by confidentiality, so unfortunately cannot be shared.
However, I can mention one without revealing confidential information. A client was in a crisis – a business partner had sought to dilute the client’s shares in their joint vehicle company and they needed urgent help. We could not go to the local courts for assistance and so we applied for urgent relief from an emergency arbitrator. We managed to get an emergency award which turned out, unexpectedly but happily, to turn the tide in a long-running and bitter dispute. The award led to a settlement on excellent terms for the client shortly afterwards.
What changes to arbitration practice have you seen in your 11 years in Singapore?
When I came to Asia in 2006, international arbitration in Singapore was just embarking on its meteoric rise in popularity. Initially, there were a relatively small number of international arbitration specialists based here. That soon changed, and now it is home to a wide pool of experienced arbitrators, counsel and experts. Over that time we have also seen a number of innovations in practice such as emergency arbitration procedures and expedited arbitration processes (particularly suited to lower value cases) which are now found in many institutional rules. Finally, in Singapore, the last 11 years has seen a large number of decisions in the courts affirming their strong support for the arbitral process. There is now a substantial body of local jurisprudence on many aspects of the law of arbitration in Singapore.
What have been the big talking points for international arbitration in Singapore this year?
There have been many talking points over the last twelve months, but three are especially worthy of mention. First, just over a year ago, members of the global arbitral community drew up a pledge to take action to address the under-representation of women on international arbitral tribunals. The pledge seeks to increase, on an equal opportunity basis, the number of women appointed as arbitrators in order to achieve a fair representation as soon practically possible, with the ultimate goal of full parity.
The pledge had garnered considerable support and generated an important dialogue within the arbitral community. Further details can be found at http://www.arbitrationpledge.com.
Second, steps have been taken to enhancing the availability and transparency of information concerning arbitrators through a project known as Arbitrator Intelligence (http://www.arbitratorintelligence.org). Arbitrator Intelligence aims to promote transparency, fairness, and accountability in the selection of international arbitrators, and to facilitate increased diversity in arbitrator appointments by allowing counsel and parties to submit questionnaires on the decision making of arbitrators who have presided over cases they have been involved in. Members will in due course be able to search accumulated information to aid in their arbitrator selection process.
Finally, one of the most talked-about topics in both Singapore and Hong Kong arbitration circles has been the advent of third party funding. Both states have adopted legislation that permit approved investors to finance the costs of bringing arbitration proceedings, in return for a share of any damages awarded. The concept of third party funding is still in its infancy in Asia, but established players from other jurisdictions such as Australia and the U.K. where funding is part of the furniture for a number of years having been working hard to raise awareness and understanding of the concept and how it can provide users of arbitration, particularly impecunious claimants, with a source of funding the costs of the arbitral process.
