21 CFR § 312.52 - Transfer of obligations to a contract research organization.
(a) A sponsor may transfer responsibility for any or all of the obligations set forth in this part to a contract research organization . Any such transfer shall be described in writing. If not all obligations are transferred, the writing is required to describe each of the obligations being assumed by the contract research organization . If all obligations are transferred, a general statement that all obligations have been transferred is acceptable. Any obligation not covered by the written description shall be deemed not to have been transferred.
(b) A contract research organization that assumes any obligation of a sponsor shall comply with the specific regulations in this chapter applicable to this obligation and shall be subject to the same regulatory action as a sponsor for failure to comply with any obligation assumed under these regulations. Thus, all references to “sponsor” in this part apply to a contract research organization to the extent that it assumes one or more obligations of the sponsor .
- En Español
- Medical Devices
- Radiation-Emitting Products
- Vaccines, Blood & Biologics
- Animal & Veterinary
- Tobacco Products
CFR - Code of Federal Regulations Title 21
The information on this page is current as of Oct 17, 2023 .
For the most up-to-date version of CFR Title 21, go to the Electronic Code of Federal Regulations (eCFR).
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 331, 351, 352, 353, 355, 360bbb, 371; 42 U.S.C. 262. Source: 52 FR 8831, Mar. 19, 1987, unless otherwise noted.
This website has been translated to Spanish from English, and is updated often. It is possible that some links will connect you to content only available in English or some of the words on the page will appear in English until translation has been completed (usually within 24 hours). We appreciate your patience with the translation process. In the case of any discrepancy in meaning, the English version is considered official. Thank you for visiting esp.fda.gov/tabaco.
Ready Room Blog
Denise Lacey January 26th, 2021 3 minute read
(Word count: 593)
Most sponsors struggle with implementation of FDA's Transfer of Regulatory Obligation requirement. Why do we find ourselves filling out a form that seems to have no legal force and no useful information?
As always, let's start with the regulation (emphasis mine):
21 CFR 312.52 Transfer of obligations to a contract research organization.
(a) A sponsor may transfer responsibility for any or all of the obligations set forth in this part to a contract research organization. Any such transfer shall be described in writing. If not, all obligations are transferred, the writing is required to describe each of the obligations being assumed by the contract research organization. If all obligations are transferred, a general statement that all obligations have been transferred is acceptable. Any obligation not covered by the written description shall be deemed not to have been transferred.
GCP is a bit broader (again, emphasis mine):
5.2.2 Any trial-related duty and function that is transferred to and assumed by a CRO should be specified in writing.
So it's not just the responsibilities outlined in 312.50 that need to be transferred in writing; any kind of trial-related function is subject to this requirement.
Sponsors take different approaches to satisfying these requirements:
1. Sign a contract with a specific scope of work and create and submit a separate "Transfer of Regulatory Obligations" (TORO) form limited to responsibilities in 21 CFR 312 Subpart D ("this part") . This is the letter-of-the-law approach to the regulation that results in a form that enumerates only responsibilities in Subpart D as they are worded in Subpart D, e.g.,
- Select qualified investigators (21 CFR 312.53 (a))
- Control of investigational drug product shipment to investigators (21 CFR 312.53 (b))
- Secure investigator compliance with the agreement contained in the signed Form FDA-1572, the general investigational plan or other investigator responsibilities or, alternatively, discontinuing investigational drug shipment (312 CFR 312.56(b)
- Maintain complete and accurate records showing any financial interest, payment(s) made to clinical investigators by the sponsor of the covered study, and all other financial interests of investigators (21 CFR 312.57(b))
Pros: Fulfills the requirement while limiting the amount of information FDA has - at least until the inspection.
Cons: Potential for inconsistency with the contract. Lack of clarity given the broad wording of Subpart D responsibilities. Many key regulatory responsibilities, like hosting the EDC system, and other trial-related duties and functions, like doing laboratory tests, aren't covered in Subpart D.
2. Submit the scope of work from the contract with the 1571.
Pros: Consistency with the contract.
Cons: Contracts do not always utilize consistent headers and footers that identify the study and the vendor. Some sponsors are sensitive about releasing "too much" information in the contract scope.
3. Create a separate TORO form that reproduces the scope of work and submit it with the 1571.
Cons: Potential for inconsistency during transcription; need to create a new form every time the scope changes.
4. Summarize transferred responsibilities at a high level in the 1571 submission, referencing the contract as the governing transfer of obligations.
Pros: Simplicity, with a clear reference point for detail.
Cons: Potential for inconsistency with contracts or misrepresentations caused by summary.
My preferred method is #2: list vendors in the 1571 and provide the scopes of work. I think it strikes the right balance between simplicity and accuracy.
Regardless of the approach, it's critical to have a contract in place before work starts that accurately describes the vendor's scope of work and does not conflict with any other source of information.
« Back to Blog
Practice, practice, practice.
5 minute read
February 6th, 2021
Storyboards: What Works?
3 minute read
January 11th, 2021
Tell Me a Story
2 minute read
February 16th, 2021
Proven inspection management for the life Sciences industry
Biotech, pharmaceutical, medical device, CMOs, CROs, and laboratories big and small are getting ready with Ready Room.
The Federal Register
The daily journal of the united states government, request access.
Due to aggressive automated scraping of FederalRegister.gov and eCFR.gov, programmatic access to these sites is limited to access to our extensive developer APIs.
If you are human user receiving this message, we can add your IP address to a set of IPs that can access FederalRegister.gov & eCFR.gov; complete the CAPTCHA (bot test) below and click "Request Access". This process will be necessary for each IP address you wish to access the site from, requests are valid for approximately one quarter (three months) after which the process may need to be repeated.
An official website of the United States government.
If you want to request a wider IP range, first request access for your current IP, and then use the "Site Feedback" button found in the lower left-hand side to make the request.
404 Not found
404 Not found
Regulatory Open Forum
- Community Home
- Discussion 55.2K
- Library 706
- Members 33.2K
Transfer of obligation (did not report to FDA) - 1571 form - IND 126.96.36.199
Anonymous Member 20-May-2022 09:52
Tom Stothoff 23-May-2022 10:20
1. transfer of obligation (did not report to fda) - 1571 form - ind 188.8.131.52.
2. RE: Transfer of obligation (did not report to FDA) - 1571 form - IND 184.108.40.206
New Best Answer
Related content, ctd section 220.127.116.11 transfer of obligations.
Transfer of obligations/Responsibilities (TORO)
New 1571 form & transfer of obligations
Transfer of obligations - signatures required?
New "open box".
Regulatory Affairs Professionals Society (RAPS) 5635 Fishers Lane, Suite 400 Rockville, Maryland 20852
[email protected] +1 301 770 2920
Join My RAPS Dashboard Learn More
Privacy & Terms
- General Assembly
- Governing Council
- Finance Committee
- Work in Progress
- Access and hours
- Library rules
- Scholarships programme
- Gorla Collection History
- Gorla Collection Catalogue
- Online Catalogue
- UNIDROIT Publications
- Uniform Law Review
- Research and Internships
Model Law on Factoring Guide to Enactment
Model Law on Warehouse Receipts
- Digital Assets and Private Law
Enforcement: Best Practices
Collaborative Legal Structures for Agri-Enterprise
Voluntary Carbon Credits
Investment Contracts and UPICC
- Reinsurance Contracts
Private Art Collections
UNIDROIT & COVID-19
- Capital Markets
- Civil Procedure
- Commercial Contracts
- Cultural Property
- International Sales
- International Will
Agricultural Development and Private Law
Contracts (in general)
Legal Aspects of Social Business
Legal Status of Women
Movement of Persons
CHAPTER 9 - SECTION 2
Chapter 9: assignment of rights,transfer of obligations, assignment of contracts - section 2: transfer of obligations, article 9.2.1 (modes of transfer).
An obligation to pay money or render other performance may be transferred from one person (the “original obligor”) to another person (the “new obligor”) either
a) by an agreement between the original obligor and the new obligor subject to Article 9.2.3, or
b) by an agreement between the obligee and the new obligor, by which the new obligor assumes the obligation.
As is the case with the assignment of rights covered by Section 1 of this Chapter, also the transfer of obligations may serve useful economic purposes. For instance, if company A can claim payment from its customer B, but itself owes a similar amount to its supplier X, it may be practical to arrange for the customer to become the supplier’s obligor.
Such a transfer of an obligation may occur in two different ways.
1. Transfer by agreement between the original obligor and the new obligor
In practice, the more frequent of the two ways indicated in this Article to transfer an obligation is by agreement between the original obligor and the new obligor, with the obligee’s consent as required by Article 9.2.3.
1. Company A owes its supplier X EUR 50,000, and customer B owes the same sum to A. A and B agree that the latter will take over the former’s obligation towards X. The obligation is transferred if X agrees to the transaction.
2. Transfer by agreement between the obligee and the new obligor
Another possibility is an agreement between the obligee and the new obligor, by which the new obligor accepts to take over the obligation.
2. The products of company X are sold by distributor A on a certain market. The contract between the parties is close to termination. Distributor B enters into negotiations with X, proposing to take over the distributorship. In order to gain X’s acceptance, B promises that it will assume a debt of EUR 50,000 still owed by A to X, and X accepts. B has become X’s obligor.
3. Obligee’s consent necessary
In both cases, the obligee must give its consent to the transfer. This is obvious when the transfer occurs by agreement between the obligee and the new obligor. If it occurs by an agreement between the original obligor and the new obligor, the requirement is stated in Article 9.2.3. Consent may be given in advance under Article 9.2.4.
Without the obligee’s consent, the obligor may agree with another person that the latter will perform the obligation under Article 9.2.6.
4. Transfer by agreement only
Only transfers by agreement are governed by this Section, as opposed to situations where the applicable law may provide for legal transfers (such as, under certain jurisdictions, the automatic transfer of obligations in the case of the merger of companies – see Article 9.2.2).
5. Obligations in respect of payment of money or other performance
This Section is not restricted to the transfer of obligations in respect of payment of money. It covers also the transfer of obligations relating to other kinds of performance, such as the rendering of a service. Nor are transferable obligations limited to obligations of a contractual nature. Obligations deriving from tort law or based on a judgment, for instance, can be governed by this Section, subject to Article 1.4.
6. What is meant by “transfer”
The “transfer” of an obligation means that it leaves the original obligor’s assets to enter those of the new obligor.
However, in some cases although the new obligor becomes bound towards the obligee, the original obligor is not discharged (see Article 9.2.5).
ARTICLE 9.2.2 (EXCLUSION)
This Section does not apply to transfers of obligations made under the special rules governing transfers of obligations in the course of transferring a business.
The Articles contained in this Section do not apply to transfers of obligations made in the course of transferring a business under any special rules governing such transfers, as may happen in the case of the merger of companies. The applicable law often provides for mechanisms that cause all rights and obligations to be transferred under certain conditions in their entirety by operation of law.
Article 9.2.2 does not prevent this Section from applying when certain obligations pertaining to the transferred business are transferred individually.
1. Company A is transferred to company B. If the otherwise applicable law provides that all obligations pertaining to the former company are automatically transferred to the latter, the Principles do not apply.
2. The facts are the same as in Illustration 1, but B has reasons to prefer not to become the obligor of company X, one of A’s suppliers. A can transfer the obligations concerned to company C, with the consent of X. This particular transfer is subject to the Principles.
ARTICLE 9.2.3 (REQUIREMENT OF OBLIGEE’S CONSENT TO TRANSFER)
The transfer of an obligation by an agreement between the original obligor and the new obligor requires the consent of the obligee.
1. Agreement between the original and the new obligor
As stated in Article 9.2.1(a), the transfer of an obligation may occur by an agreement between the original obligor and the person who will become the new obligor.
2. Obligee’s consent required
This agreement, however, does not suffice to transfer the obligation. It is also necessary for the obligee to give its consent.
This is different from the corresponding rule on the assignment of rights, where the operation is in principle effective without the consent of the obligor (see Article 9.1.7). The assignment of a right does not affect the obligor’s situation, except that the obligor will have to deliver performance to another person. On the contrary, a change of obligor may considerably affect the obligee’s position, as the new obligor may be less reliable than the original one. The change may therefore not be imposed on the obligee, who must consent to it.
Company A owes USD 150,000 to company X, located in Asia, for services rendered. Due to a reorganisation of the group, A’s activities in Asia are taken over by affiliate company B. A and B agree that B will take over A’s debt towards X. The obligation is transferred only if X gives its consent.
3. Original obligor not necessarily discharged
With the obligee’s consent, the new obligor becomes bound by the obligation. It does not necessarily follow that the original obligor is discharged (see Article 9.2.5).
4. Lack of consent by the oblige
If the obligee refuses to consent to the transfer, or if its consent is not solicited, an arrangement for a third party performance is possible under Article 9.2.6.
ARTICLE 9.2.4 (ADVANCE CONSENT OF OBLIGEE)
(1) The obligee may give its consent in advance.
(2) If the obligee has given its consent in advance, the transfer of the obligation becomes effective when a notice of the transfer is given to the obligee or when the obligee acknowledges it.
1. Advance consent by the obligee
Paragraph (1) of this Article provides that the obligee’s consent, required under Article 9.2.3, may be given in advance.
1. Licensor X enters into a transfer of technology agreement with licensee A. For a period of ten years, A will have to pay royalties to X. When the contract is concluded, A envisages that at some time in the future it will prefer the royalties to be paid by its affiliate, company B. X may agree in advance in the contract to the obligation to pay the royalties being transferred by A to B.
2. When the transfer is effective as to the obligee
According to paragraph (2), if the obligee has given its consent in advance, the transfer of the obligation becomes effective when it is notified to the obligee or when the obligee acknowledges it. This means that it is sufficient for either the original or the new obligor to notify the obligee of the transfer when it occurs. Notification is not needed if it appears that the obligee has acknowledged the transfer, to which it had given its consent in advance. “Acknowledgement” means giving an overt sign of having become aware of the transfer.
2. The facts are the same as in Illustration 1, but there comes a time when A actually agrees with B that from then on the latter will take over the obligation to pay the royalties. This decision becomes effective when notice is given to X.
3. The facts are the same as in Illustration 1. No notice is given, but the first time B pays the yearly royalties, X writes to B to acknowledge receipt of the payment and to confirm that from then on it will expect B to pay the royalties. The transfer is effective with this acknowledgement.
ARTICLE 9.2.5 (DISCHARGE OF ORIGINAL OBLIGOR)
(1) The obligee may discharge the original obligor.
(2) The obligee may also retain the original obligor as an obligor in case the new obligor does not perform properly.
(3) Otherwise the original obligor and the new obligor are jointly and severally liable.
1. Extent of original obligor’s discharge
The obligee’s consent, whether given under Article 9.2.1(b) or under Article 9.2.3, has the effect of binding the new obligor to the obligation. What still remains to be determined is whether the original obligor is discharged. It is primarily up to the obligee to choose among different options. Only in the case of Article 9.2.1(b) will the choice depend also on the original obligor.
2. Obligee’s choice: full discharge
The obligee may first of all fully discharge the original obligor.
1. Supplier X accepts that its obligor company A transfer its obligation to pay the price to customer B. Fully confident that the new obligor is solvent and reliable, X discharges A. Should B fail to perform, the loss will be on X who will have no recourse against A.
3. Obligee’s choice: original obligor retained as a subsidiary obligor
Another possibility is for the obligee to accept the transfer of the obligation from the original obligor to the new obligor on condition that it retain a claim against the original obligor.
There are two options.
The first option is that the original obligor is retained as an obligor in the event that the new obligor does not perform properly. In this case the obligee must claim performance first from the new obligor, but if the new obligor does not perform properly the obligee may call upon the original obligor.
2. Supplier X accepts that its obligor company A transfer its obligation to pay the price to customer B, but this time stipulates that A will remain bound if B does not perform properly. X no longer has a direct claim against A, and must first request performance from B. However, should B fail to perform, X will have a claim against A.
4. Obligee’s choice: original obligor and new obligor jointly and severally liable
The second option, the one most favourable to the obligee, is to consider the original obligor and the new obligor jointly and severally liable. This means that when performance is due, the obligee can exercise its claim against either the original or the new obligor (see Articles 11.1.3 et seq.). Should the obligee obtain performance from the original obligor, the latter would then have a claim against the new obligor (see Articles 11.1.10 et seq.).
3. Supplier X accepts that its obligor company A transfer its obligation to pay the price to customer B, but stipulates that A and B will remain jointly and severally liable. In this case X may request performance from either A or B. Should B perform properly, both A and B would be fully discharged. Should A have to render performance to X, it would then have right of recourse against B.
5. Default rule
The language of this Article makes it clear that the last-mentioned option is the default rule. In other words, if the obligee has neither indicated that it intends to discharge the original obligor, nor indicated that it intends to keep the original obligor as a subsidiary obligor, the original obligor and the new obligor are jointly and severally liable.
4. Supplier X accepts that its obligor company A transfer its obligation to pay the price to customer B, but says nothing about the liability of A. Also in this case X may request performance from either A or B. Should B perform properly, both the original and the new obligor would be fully discharged. Should A have to render performance to X, it would then have right of recourse against B.
6. Original obligor refusing to be discharged
When the obligation is assumed by means of an agreement between the obligee and the new obligor, as provided in Article 9.2.1(b), and the agreement provides that the original obligor is discharged, the agreement amounts to a contract in favour of a third party. Under Article 5.2.6 such a benefit cannot be imposed on the beneficiary, who may have reasons not to accept it. The original obligor may thus refuse to be discharged by the agreement between the obligee and the new obligor.
If such a refusal occurs, the new obligor is bound to the obligee, but the original obligor and the new obligor are jointly and severally liable, in accordance with the default rule of Article 9.2.5(3).
5. The facts are the same as in Illustration 1, except that the obligation is assumed by an agreement between X and B, and that X discharges A. If A is no longer interested in a business relationship with B, it may accept to be discharged. On the other hand, if A wants to keep the possibilities it has of benefiting from a renewal of its contract with X, it might wish to keep the relationship and may therefore refuse to be discharged.
ARTICLE 9.2.6 (THIRD PARTY PERFORMANCE)
(1) Without the obligee’s consent, the obligor may contract with another person that this person will perform the obligation in place of the obligor, unless the obligation in the circumstances has an essentially personal character.
(2) The obligee retains its claim against the obligor.
1. Agreement on performance by another party
Obligations can be transferred either by an agreement between the original obligor and the new obligor, with the obligee’s consent (see Article 9.2.1(a)), or by an agreement between the obligee and the new obligor (see Article 9.2.1(b)).
There may be situations in which the consent of the obligee is lacking, either because it has not been solicited, or because it has been refused. In such cases the obligor may agree with another person that this person will perform the obligation in its place. When performance becomes due, the other person will render it to the obligee.
While an obligee may refuse to accept a new obligor before performance is due, in principle it may not refuse to accept the performance itself when it is offered by another party.
1. Companies A and B have entered into a co-operation agreement for their activities on a certain market. At a certain point they decide to redistribute some of their tasks. Thus, B will take over all operations concerning telecommunications which were previously A’s responsibility. On the following 30 October A would have been bound to pay company X, a local operator, a sum of USD 100,000. The two partners agree that B will pay that amount when it is due. On 30 October X may not refuse such a payment made by B.
2. Obligation of an essentially personal character
Third party performances may not be refused by the obligee in all the cases in which they would be equally satisfactory as performances rendered by the obligor. The situation is different when the performance due is of an essentially personal character, linked to the obligor’s specific qualifications. The obligee may then insist on receiving performance by the obligor itself.
2. In Illustration 1, B also takes over operations for the maintenance of some sophisticated technological equipment developed by A and sold to company Y. The partners agree that the next yearly maintenance will be carried out by B. When B’s technicians arrive at Y’s premises, Y may refuse their intervention, invoking the fact that due to the highly technical nature of the verifications involved, they are entitled to receive performance from the specialised staff of A.
ARTICLE 9.2.7 (DEFENCES AND RIGHTS OF SET-OFF)
(1) The new obligor may assert against the obligee all defences which the original obligor could assert against the obligee.
(2) The new obligor may not exercise against the obligee any right of set-off available to the original obligor against the obligee.
1. Assertion of defences
The obligation transferred to the new obligor is the very same obligation that used to bind the original obligor (and, in some cases, still binds it – see Article 9.2.5).
Whenever the original obligor would have been able to withhold or refuse payment to the obligee on the basis of a defence, such as the defective performance of the obligee’s own obligations, the new obligor may rely on the same defence against the obligee.
1. Company A owes company X EUR 200,000, due to be paid at the end of the year, as payment for facilities management services. With X’s consent A transfers this obligation to company B. X renders A extremely defective services which would have given A a valid defence for refusing payment. When payment is due, B may assert the same defence against X.
2. Defences of a procedural nature
The same solution applies to defences of a procedural nature.
2. The facts are the same as in Illustration 1, except that X sues B before a court at its place of business. B can successfully invoke the arbitration clause included in the contract between A and X.
The right of set-off relating to an obligation owed by the obligee to the original obligor may however not be exercised by the new obligor. The reciprocity requirement is not fulfilled between the obligee and the new obligor. The original obligor may still exercise its right of set-off if it has not been discharged.
ARTICLE 9.2.8 (RIGHTS RELATED TO THE OBLIGATION TRANSFERRED)
(1) The obligee may assert against the new obligor all its rights to payment or other performance under the contract in respect of the obligation transferred.
(2) If the original obligor is discharged under Article 9.2.5(1), a security granted by any person other than the new obligor for the performance of the obligation is discharged, unless that other person agrees that it should continue to be available to the obligee.
(3) Discharge of the original obligor also extends to any security of the original obligor given to the obligee for the performance of the obligation, unless the security is over an asset which is transferred as part of a transaction between the original obligor and the new obligor.
1. Scope of the transfer
The rules laid down in this Article are inspired by the same principle as Article 9.2.7. The obligation is transferred to the new obligor as it is, not only with the defences the original obligor was able to assert, but also with all the rights to payment or to other performances under the contract that the obligee had in respect of the obligation transferred.
The following illustrations provide examples of such rights.
1. Company A must reimburse bank X for a loan of EUR 1,000,000 bearing an interest rate of 3%. A transfers its obligation to reimburse the principal to company B. The transfer also includes the obligation to pay the 3% interest.
2. The facts are the same as in Illustration 1, except that the loan contract entitles X to claim premature reimbursement if A fails to pay the interest due. X can assert also this right against B.
2. Contractual deviations
Party autonomy permits deviations from the rules laid down in this Article, such as a separate transfer of the obligation to pay interest.
3. Securities in assignment of rights and transfer of obligations compared
In the case of the assignment of a right, all rights securing performance are automatically transferred to the assignee (see Article 9.1.14(b)). This solution is justified by the fact that the assignment of a right does not alter the obligor’s situation, i.e. securities can continue to serve their purposes in unchanged circumstances.
The transfer of an obligation to a new obligor on the contrary modifies the context in which the security has been granted. If the original obligor is discharged, and if the security were to be transferred with the obligation, the risk of breach or insolvency to be covered would be that of another person, thus completely altering the object of the security.
If the original obligor’s obligation was covered by a suretyship granted by another person, this suretyship can survive if the original obligor remains bound. If, on the other hand, the original obligor is discharged, the suretyship cannot be transferred to cover the new obligor, unless the person who granted the suretyship agrees that it should continue to be available to the obligee.
3. Company A owes USD 1,000,000 to company X. Bank S has agreed to guarantee due performance of this obligation. With X’s agreement, A transfers the obligation to company B, and X accepts to discharge A. S does not guarantee B’s obligation, unless it agrees to continue to provide the security.
A special case occurs when the suretyship was granted by the person who was itself to become the new obligor. In such a case, the security necessarily disappears, since a person cannot provide a security for its own obligation.
5. Securities over assets
The original obligor may have given one of its assets as security. In this case, if the obligation is transferred and the original obligor is discharged, the security ceases to cover the obligation now binding the new obligor.
4. Bank X has granted a loan of EUR 100,000 to company A, secured by a deposit of shares by the obligor. With X’s agreement, A transfers the obligation to pay back the loan to company B, and X accepts to discharge A. The shares cease to serve as security.
The solution is different if the asset given as security is transferred as part of a transaction between the original and the new obligor.
5. The facts are the same as in Illustration 4, but the transfer of the obligation between A and B occurs as part of a broader operation in which ownership of the shares is also transferred to B. In such a situation, the shares will continue to serve as security for B’s obligation to reimburse the loan.
- UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES 2010
- Official Languages
- Other Languages
- Preparatory work
- Conferences and Seminars
- Agricultural land investment contracts
- Contract Farming
- Security interests
The International Institute for the Unification of Private Law (UNIDROIT) is an independent intergovernmental Organisation with its seat in the Villa Aldobrandini in Rome. Its purpose is to study needs and methods for modernising, harmonising and co-ordinating private and in particular commercial law as between States and groups of States and to formulate uniform law instruments, principles and rules to achieve those objectives.
GET IN TOUCH
By Art&Design s.r.l.
© UNIDROIT 2021. All Rights Reserved. Disclaimer
Dr Giray graduated from Istanbul University’s Law Faculty in 1998 before obtaining a postgraduate degree in EU Law from Marmara University European Union Institute in 2000. He carried out academic research at the London University Advanced Legal Studies Institute for his doctorate thesis in 2004. He was awarded a Ph.D. in Private Law from Istanbul University’s Social Sciences Institute in 2007. He worked as a research assistant from 1999 to 2007 at Istanbul University’s Law Faculty in the Private International Law Department. Then, he was appointed as a military judge to the 2nd Army Commandership for military service.
He was appointed as an assistant professor in 2008. While conducting research at Georgetown University’s School of Law, he was granted with a scholarship from the Turkish Higher Education Council and Georgetown University for the 2011-2012 academic year. He simultaneously conducted research on ICSID arbitration at the World Bank and also at the Library of Congress.
Dr Giray was appointed as an associate professor in 2013 due to his articles and book named “Compensation Arising from Expropriation in International Investment Arbitration and Methods Used in the Calculation of Compensation”. He was appointed as a full-time professor in the same department in 2020 due to his articles, projects and a new book named “Limitation Periods in International Private and Procedural Law”.
In 2022 he was appointed as a Correspondent of Turkey by the International Institute for the Unification of Private Law (UNIDROIT).
He gives courses on Private International Law and International Civil Procedural Law for undergraduates, as well as International Family and Child Law, Disability Rights and International Investment Law-ICSID Arbitration for postgraduate students of the Law Faculty and Social Sciences Institute at Istanbul University, while carrying out administrative duties at the same time. Currently, he is pursuing additional postgraduate studies on Tax Law.
Mr Alvaro Galindo is an International Counsel advising on dispute resolution matters, particularly those involving Latin American jurisdictions. Currently, he is the Dean of the Law School at Universidad de las Americas. His practice focuses on disputes between sovereign states and state-owned entities and private companies. He has been recognised by The Legal 500 Latin America and was noted in this publication as “outstandingly intelligent” and for his “incomparable capacity for coordinating, planning, strategic assessment, and for his diplomatic approach”.
He was as member of the international arbitration practice at Dechert LLP in Washington, D.C. He also served as the Director of the International Affairs and Arbitration Unit for the Republic of Ecuador’s Attorney General’s Office. He acted as a legal consultant for the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) in Washington, D.C., and as regional director for the Latin American Development Corporation, where he coordinated the committee in charge of drafting the Arbitration Law of Ecuador.
Mr Galindo has significant teaching experience in the areas of dispute resolution, international investment, and arbitration law. He has authored numerous publications and articles related to arbitration and international investment law.
Currently, he is an Adjunct Professor at Georgetown University Law Center, with a course on Advanced Topics in International Investment Arbitration and Adjunct Professor of Practical Aspects of Arbitration (Spanish course) at American University Washington College of Law.
Mr Galindo has represented sovereign states in international and regional forums: the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, UNCTAD; the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, UNCITRAL.
Member of the Court of the ICC International Court of Arbitration and arbitrator in various arbitration centres in Latin America. In September 2021, he was appointed to the list of arbitrators under the ICSID Convention.
My main areas of expertise related to UNIDROIT work include international commercial contracts, international civil proceedings and private international law.
Derek was permanently appointed to the Supreme Court (now renamed the High Court) as a Judge, with effect from 1 November 2017. This after being in private practice for nearly thirty years. His main interest areas and focus areas are in commercial law, with a particular interest in Private International Law.
Derek has already used the UNIDROIT Principles and the UNIDROIT Model Clauses in several commercial High Court judgments since June 2022. He has benefitted immeasurably from being exposed to the workings of UNIDROIT. Put in another way, “my eyes have been opened”.
Derek has used the UNIDROIT Principles and the UNIDROIT Model Clauses as an interpretive aid by way of application in several judgments that have since been reported as precedent jurisprudence in South Africa. He has also effectively utilised the UNIDROIT Principles and the UNIDROIT Model Clauses to supplement domestic law in his judgments by referencing the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa.
Antenor Madruga is a founding partner of the law firm Madruga BTW and recognised as a leading Brazilian lawyer in complex litigations and negotiations involving government criminal and administrative proceedings, particularly in multijurisdictional cases. He was the lead counsel in several of the major white-collar cases in Brazil. He is currently a member of the Self-Regulation Board of the Brazilian Federation of Banks (FEBRABAN). In his former career as a Federal Attorney, Mr. Madruga occupied several positions in the Brazilian government, among them: Director of the Department of Assets Recovery and International Legal Cooperation of the Ministry of Justice, Coordinator of the National Strategy Against Money Laundering (ENCCLA); Board of the Brazilian Financial Intelligence Unit (COAF); and National Secretary of Justice. Ph.D. in International Law.
Full Professor at the Department of Law at the Federal University of Espírito Santo -UFES. Professor of the Master’s Program in Procedural Law at UFES. Postgraduate in International Economics and Finance and PhD in Law and International Relations from the University of Barcelona. Member of the American Association of Private International Law – currently holds the position of Vice President of Communication and Publishing. Member of the Brazilian Academy of International Law; the Brazilian Association Elas no Processo; the Brazilian Association of Procedural Law; and the Brazilian Association of Women in the Legal Career. Member of the International and Latin American Networks of International Civil Procedure. Coordinator of the Research Group and the Jurisprudence Observatory – Labyrinth of the Codification of International Civil Procedural Law. Researcher in the project “Keys for Digital and Algorithmic Justice with a Gender Perspective. Practice Areas: Public International Law. Private International Law. International Civil Procedural Law. Comparative law. International Trade Law. Theory and Comparison between Systems. Main areas related to the work of UNIDROIT: Civil Procedure; ELI Model European Rules of Civil Procedure; ALI/UNIDROIT Principles; Best Practices for Effective Enforcement; Cross-Border Investment; Law and Technology; Arbitration; Intellectual Property and other subjects.
Mr Gama Jr. is a Brazilian lawyer and arbitrator. Currently, he holds the position of Adjunct Professor at the Pontifical Catholic University of Rio (PUC-Rio), where he teaches Private International Law and International Commercial Arbitration. He is a correspondent of the UNIDROIT since 2016 and a member of the CISG Advisory Council. Mr Gama Jr. acted as counsel and arbitrator in more than 100 cases, under the rules of ICC, LCIA, UNCITRAL and Brazilian arbitral institutions. His experience includes corporate law, M&A transactions, shareholders agreements, major construction contracts, built-to-suit contracts, insurance disputes, international sale of goods, services, consulting, joint-ventures and transfer of technology. He has authored a number of books and articles related to the UNIDROIT Principles. In 2016, Lauro lectured at the Hague Academy of International Law on the topic of “The UNIDROIT Principles as the law applicable to commercial contracts”, which was published in vol. 406 of the Collected Courses.
Lauro participated in the UNIDROIT working groups which produced the UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts, 3rd edition (2005-2010), and the Model Clauses for the use of the UNIDROIT Principles (2012-2013). Moreover, he worked on the Portuguese version of the Black Letter rules of the 2016 UNIDROIT Principles, and was one of the five experts who collaborated with UNCITRAL, HCCH and UNIDROIT to develop the “Legal Guide to Uniform Instruments in the Area of International Commercial Contracts, with a Focus on Sales”, which was published in 2021.
Mr Fontoura Costa researches and teaches International Business Law and Comparative Law at the University of São Paulo. He focuses on issues such as: (i) arbitration; (ii) civil procedure; (iii) commodities production and trade; (iv) company law; (v) contract law and clauses; (vi) energy; (vii) information technologies; (viii) infrastructure; (ix) intellectual rights; (x) negotiable instruments; and (xi) transport law. He also acts as lawyer and arbitrator.
Mr Ferro Catapani is a Federal Judge and Professor at the Federal University of São Paulo. He has experience in research and teaching of commercial law and financial market regulation. His main areas of expertise related to the work of UNIDROIT, include: (i) legal structure of agricultural enterprises; (ii) capital markets and banking law; (iii) bank insolvency; (iv) netting; (v) factoring; (vi) franchising; (vii) leasing; (viii) negotiable instruments; (ix) security Interests.
Fabio holds a PhD (summa cum laude) in Civil Law, with research on secured transactions and security rights, from Université Panthéon-Assas (Paris 2) and University of São Paulo, Brazil.
He is lawyer in Brazil, acting in the field of real estate law and financing, including receivables financing through the capital markets for the real estate industry.
He was also a delegate of Brazil in UNCITRAL Working Group VI (Security Interests) and he has assisted multiple organizations and governments in drafting secured credit and public registries’ reforms, including in Angola, Brazil, Madagascar, Mozambique and São Tomé and Príncipe.
Professor Sheelagh McCracken is Professor of Finance Law at the University of Sydney, Australia and a Fellow of the Australian Academy of Law.
She has lectured on finance law in various centres in Australia and around the Asia-Pacific region, including Singapore, Hong Kong, Beijing and Tokyo. She writes and speaks regularly on secured transactions law, focusing in particular on the development, operation and application of personal property securities legislation in Australia.
A graduate of the University of Cambridge, she obtained her PhD from the University of Sydney, which was subsequently published in the UK as The Banker’s Remedy of Set-Off and is currently in its third edition. Other major publications include a standard Australian text, Everett & McCracken’s Banking and Financial Institutions Law which she has co-authored since its first publication over 30 years ago and is now in its 9 th edition.
Professor of Space Law and Emeritus of International Law, Sapienza University of Rome. Vice-President of Italian Society for International Organization (SIOI). Chairman of European Centre for Space Law (ECSL/ESA). General Counsel of International Astronautical Federation (IAF). Member of the Advisory Council of European Space Policy Institute (ESPI). Senior Legal Advisor of Italian Space Agency (ASI).
Legal Expert at Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Italian Delegate to the 2001 Cape Town Diplomatic Conference for the Adoption of the UNIDROIT Convention on International Interests in High Value Mobile Equipment and Protocol on Matters specific to Aircraft Assets.
Chair of the Committee of Governmental Experts for the preparation of a Protocol to the Cape Town Convention on Matters specific to Space Assets (2003-2012). Chair of the Committee of the Whole of the 2012 Berlin Diplomatic Conference, which adopted the Protocol.
Since 2013, Chair of the Space Preparatory Commission, set up as Provisional Supervisory Authority for establishing the International Registry for Space Assets under the guidance of UNIDROIT General Assembly. Since 2010, UNIDROIT correspondent for Italy.
Italian delegate to UNCOPUOS, since 1997. Chairman of Legal Subcommittee (2004-2006) and Co-chair of Expert Group on Regulatory Regimes of the Working Group on Long-Term Sustainability of the Outer Space Activities (2010-2018).
Since 2007, Italian delegate to the Council of the EU for the Negotiation of the International Code of Conduct on Outer Space Activities (ICoC). Chair of the multilateral negotiations on ICoC held at the United Nations (New York, 2015).
Member of two UN Group of Governmental Experts on Outer Space Transparency and Confidence-Building Measures (TCBMs, 2011-2013), and on Practical Measures for the Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space (PAROS, 2018-2019). Member of the Specialized Panel of Permanent Court of Arbitration pursuant to Optional Rules on Disputes relating to Outer Space Activities.
Ms Olga Fonotova is an Associate Professor of the Faculty of Law (Department of Legal Regulation of Business) at the Russian National Research University “Higher School of Economics” in Moscow. She holds a PhD degree cum laude in private law / private international law from the Lomonosov Moscow State University (2006). Her academic and teaching interests cover private international law, international and national commercial law, with a focus on unified and non-state legal regulation of cross-border commerce.
Olga is a Russian law qualified practicing lawyer in the sphere of national and international commercial and corporate law with 20+ years’ experience in leading law firms. As part of her legal practice, she has advised multinational corporations on the setting up of multi-jurisdictional commercial relations, on the formation / termination of international joint ventures, restructuring of assets, and financing / refinancing of projects. For her work on commercial and corporate legal matters she was included in the international rating of leading lawyers “The Best Lawyers® in Russia” (2018 – 2022).
She is a UNIDROIT alumna (2011) and a Correspondent of UNIDROIT in Russia (2023 – 2025). From 2016 to 2021 Olga was a member of the ICC Commission on Commercial Law and Practice (ICC CLP) and a member of the Association of European Business (AEB) in Moscow.
Dr Ole Böger is a Judge in Banking and Criminal matters at the Hanseatic Court of Appeal (Hanseatisches Oberlandesgericht) in Bremen, Germany, and a Lecturer at the University of Bremen. Previously, he has been, amongst others, a Desk Officer at the German Federal Ministry of Justice and for Consumer Protection (2013-2016), a Legal Officer at UNIDROIT working on the UNIDROIT Principles of Close-Out Netting (2012-2013) and a research assistant at the Max-Planck-Institute for Foreign and Comparative Private Law in Hamburg, Germany (2003-2008). During his time at the Max-Planck-Institute, he was part of the working group on personal and proprietary security of the Study Group on a European Civil Code (von Bar-Group) and he is the co-editor, together with Professor Ulrich Drobnig, of the Principles of European Law on Proprietary Security in Movables (Book IX of the Draft Common Frame of Reference, DCFR). He has represented the German government in the UNCITRAL Working Group VI on Security Interests (UNCITRAL Practice Guide to the Model Law on Secured Transactions, 2020) and in various functions at UNIDROIT, specifically in the preparation and adoption of the UNIDROIT MAC Protocol, and he is an Ex officio Observer to the Preparatory Commission for the Establishment of the International Registry for MAC equipment and the Chair of its Registrar Working Group. Recently, he has been an external consultant to secured transactions law reform projects of the World Bank in Suriname (2016), Greece (2020) and Lebanon (2021). Dr Böger holds law degrees of the University of Göttingen in Germany and King’s College London (UK) and he has authored numerous publications with a focus on international secured transactions law, including the UNIDROIT Cape Town Convention and its Protocols, and the law of payment services.
Irini Stamatoudi is a Law Professor at the University of Nicosia (Cyprus) and a lawyer at the Supreme Court of Athens (Greece). She is specialised in Copyright and in Cultural Heritage Law. She holds degrees from the University of Athens – Greece (Law Degree) and the University of Leicester – UK (LL.M., Ph.D.). From 2007 – 2018 she was the General Director of the Hellenic Copyright Organisation (competent governmental organisation for copyright matters). She has taught at the Law School of the University of Leicester, on the joint LL.M. of the University of Turin, ILO, and WIPO, at the International Hellenic University, at the Academy of the World Intellectual Property Organization and on several other academic courses. For many years she acted as a legal counselor to the Ministry of Culture on issues of illegal trafficking of antiquities where she handled the famous return cases of masterpieces from the J. P. Getty Museum (in Los Angeles) and from the Leon Levy & Shelby White collection (NY). Since 1999 she has participated in several negotiation committees on the issue of Parthenon Marbles and is currently a member of the Ministry of Culture Advisory Committee on the Parthenon Marbles. She has published thirteen books in copyright and in cultural heritage law in Greece and abroad and several articles in academic journals worldwide. Some of her writings are considered internationally works of reference (e.g., I. Stamatoudi, Multimedia products as copyright works, Cambridge University Press, 2002, (reprint in paperback in January 2008, Kindle Edition 2010); I. Stamatoudi, Cultural Property Law and Restitution. A Commentary to International Conventions and European Union Law, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham (UK) – Northampton (US), 2011, I. Stamatoudi and P. Torremans (eds), European Union Copyright Law. A Commentary, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham (UK) – Northampton (US), 2014, and 2021 (2nd ed.)).
Main areas of expertise:
A. Substantive law: contracts; fiduciary relationships and trusts; secured transactions; commercial law generally and transnational commercial law in particular; company law; financial services. B. Private international law (conflict of laws). C. International civil procedure. D. Arbitration.
Correspondent of UNIDROIT since 1998 Attorney since 1978, specialist in international road transport law and transport insurance la w. Doctor in Law. Thesis, concerning liability of the carrier (cum laude). Member of the Spanish Royal Academy of Law. Vice-president of the Committee on Legal Affairs of the International Road Transport Union (IRU, Geneva, Switzerland) Chairman of the “ad hoc” Working Group for the updating of the IRU 1976 model of CMR consignment note, which was approved by IRU in 2007. Member of the International Legal Assistance Network agreed by the IRU. Consultant to the United Nations in traffic and road transport international conventions. Member of the Board of Directors and President of the Working Group “Transport Insurance” in AIDA (International Association of Insurance Law), Spanish section – SEAIDA. Lecturer in various University Master degrees (postgraduate courses) and speaker in various national and international congresses on Transport Law, transport insurance, etc. Author of several books (including the first book in Spain dealing with the whole CMR Convention) and hundreds of articles about Transport Law, Transport Insurance and other transport related activities. Member of the Editorial Staff of the legal journal European Transport Law (Antwerpen, Belgium). Sanchez-Gamborino’s opinions have been quoted several times as legal literature by Spanish Courts of Justice when deciding transport cases. Speech (November 2008) before the Spanish Parliament when National Transport Law, now in force, was being worded. His opinions quoted in the Bulletin of the Spanish Senate (September 2009). As to his relationship with UNIDROIT , his texts published several times in the Uniform Law Review (nr. 2001-3, pp. 643-648; nr. 2006-3, pp. 677-682; nr. 2016-4, pp. 561-573) and attended meetings at Rome, such as when drafting the CRTD (Convention on the civil liability for damages on the transport of dangerous goods), May 1986, jointly with the Delegation of IRU.
Ben Schuijling’s expertise spans the broad field of business law, with an emphasis on secured transactions, restructuring and insolvency. In relation to the work of UNIDROIT his areas of expertise include security interests, factoring, leasing, commercial contracts, agency and intermediated securities.
Prof. (Dr.) Sandeepa Bhat is working as a Professor of Law and Director of Centre for Aviation and Space Laws at National University of Juridical Sciences, Kolkata. He has the teaching and research experience of nearly twenty years. He was a University First Rank holder with double gold medals for his LL.M. and a University Third Rank holder with gold medal for top-scoring his college during LL.B. His five Major Research Projects are sponsored by World Bank, ISRO, the WB Judicial Academy, Ministry of Justice and Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change. Apart from being UNIDROIT Correspondent for India, he has the distinction of being a member of the American Society of International Law, International Academy of Space Law, and the International Institute of Space Law. Dr. Bhat has published eight books and more than fifty five articles in the journals of international and national repute. He has presented over hundred and forty research papers in the international and national conferences including the coveted International Astronautical Congress, as well as in international conferences held at Jakarta, Seoul, Sharjah, Singapore, Changsha, Paris, Austin, Southampton and Cambridge. He also has the distinction of being a member of Indian Space Research Organization’s Expert Group for drafting the National Space Act for India.
Bruce Whittaker is an Honorary Senior Fellow at Melbourne Law School, University of Melbourne. Before joining the Law School, Bruce was for many years a lawyer and partner at law firm Ashurst.
Bruce’s legal expertise is in the field of banking and finance law, with a particular focus on secured transactions law.
Bruce has been involved in a number of UNIDROIT projects. He was a member of the Australian delegation to UNIDROIT that developed and settled the text of the MAC Protocol to the Cape Town Convention. He continues to represent Australia as a member of the Preparatory Commission that is tasked with the implementation of the MAC Protocol, and in that context is chair of the drafting committee for the development of the regulations that will underpin the operation of the Register. Bruce is also a member of the expert working groups that have been established by UNIDROIT to develop its proposed Model Laws on Factoring and Warehouse Receipts. He is the co-chair of the drafting committee for each of these Model Laws.
Bruce has honours degrees in law and arts from the University of Melbourne.
My main areas of expertise related to the work of UNIDROIT are Capital Markets, Security Interests and Commercial Contracts
Ergun Özsunay graduated from the Istanbul University Faculty of Law in 1957 and joined the faculty staff. As a research assistant he studied with Alfred F. Conard and E. Allan Farnsworth (visiting professors, 1957-59). He attended graduate studies at Harvard Law School in 1959/60 (LL.M.). He obtained his PhD degree at Istanbul University (1961). In 1962 and 1963 he attended “Faculté International pour l’Enseignement de Droit Comparé” (“Diplome de Droit Comparé” and “Diplome d’Etudes Supérieures de Droit Comparé”) in Strasbourg. Then he studied at Max Planck Institut für auslaendisches-und internationales Privatrecht” for his Habilitationsschriftı (1965/66). He was appointed full professor of law for Civil Law and Comparative Law at Istanbul Uni. Faculty of Law and elected as the Director of the Institute of Comparative Law in 1978. He was active in the AIDC and AISJ (former president). After his retirement Prof. Özsunay served as a member of the Turkish delegations in UNCITRAL and DH-BIO (CoE). At present he teaches Civil Law (Contracts and Specific Types of Contracts, Torts (Civil Liability), Secured Transactions, comparative competition law, and International Arbitration and the US legal system). He has written several books and works on these topics.
Prof. Özsunay represented Türkiye in the following diplomatic conferences: “Convention on Agency in the International Sale of Goods” (1983); “Convention on the Applicable Law to Contracts for the International Sale of Goods” (1985); “Unidroit Conventions on International Factoring and International Financial Leasing” (1988), and in several Working Groups in UNCITRAL (II, III, VI).
He continues his activities in the following international organizations: “International Academy of Comparative Law (AIDC/IACL) (membre titulaire); “International Association of Legal Science” (A.I.S.J./IALS); “UNIDROIT” (correspondent member); “Deutsche Gesellschaft für Rechtsvergleichung” (correspondent member);“International Association of Procedural Law”; UNCITRAL WG II (Arbitration-Conciliation, until 2019); WG III (Online Dispute Resolution, and Investor-State Dispute Settlement) (until 2019); CoE: DH-BIO” (until 2019).
I am a lawyer and notary; Master in International Trade; Career Ambassador of the Diplomatic Service of El Salvador; Professor of Private International Law, Public International Law and Integration Law; Rapporteur on Private International Law when I was a Member of the Inter-American Juridical Committee of the OAS for 16 years; author of several articles on private international law; lecturers at various American Universities on issues of private international law; Panelist on the Vienna Convention on the International Sale of Goods at the UNCITRAL/UNCITRAL headquarters; Member of IHLADI (Instituto Hispano Luso Americano de Derecho Internacional); Founding Member of ASADIP (American Association of Private International Law); member of AMEDIP (Mexican Association of Private and Comparative International Law).
Dhafer DRIDI is a Lecturer at the Faculty of Law and Political Sciences of the University of Tunis. He teaches international contract law to the students of the master’s programme in International Business Law.
Dhafer is also an attorney in Tunisia, having practiced law since his admission to the Tunisian Bar in 2005. He is currently the proprietor of a law office in Tunis that offers legal services in several areas, such as arbitration, private international law, corporate law, banking and finance.
Dhafer has authored numerous academic articles published in local and regional revues and books. Dhafer has been invited as a speaker to several symposia and events addressing significant legal issues relating to arbitration and private international law. He is a native speaker of Arabic and a fluent speaker of French and English.
Dhafer has held a number of positions in academic, research, and civil society organisations. In particular, he was a trainer at L’Institut Supérieur de la Magistrature (The Higher Institute of the Judiciary), L’Institut Supérieur de la Profession d’Avocat (The Higher Institute of the Legal Profession), and L’Ecole Nationale des Finances (The National School of Finance).
Dhafer was a member of the research commission at the University of Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines – University of Paris-Saclay and a member of the translation team of the Diplomatic Conference which adopted the Aircraft Protocol under the auspices of UNIDROIT. He is a vice-president of the Tunisian Association for ADR.
Dhafer participated in several academic trainings and summer programmes offered by globally-renowned institutions abroad. He was a visiting researcher at UNIDROIT from December 2007 to January 2008 and an independent researcher at the same institution from November to December 2005. In the summer of 2006, he took the summer course at The Hague Academy of International Law. In the summer of 2007, he took part in the intensive training offered by the International Training Centre for Human Rights and Peace Teaching in Strasbourg. Over the same summer, he also took the summer course of the Human Rights Institute in Strasbourg.
Allan M. Mukuki, PhD Candidate (Navarra, Spain), LLM (Groningen, Netherlands), PGDip (KSL), LLB (Hons) (UoN), ACIArb (London), Advocate of the High Court of Kenya .
Some of his many roles in the legal profession include Director of International Partnerships; a Doctoral Fellow; member of the Management Committee and moot court coordinator, all for Strathmore Law School; Research Fellow for the African Region (Kenya), for the European Research Council Grant Project on the interpretation of customary international law; and Acting Director for the Strathmore Institute of Advanced Studies in International Criminal Justice (SIASIC) Allan has previously worked at A.F Gross Advocate; in various legal institutes; in governmental agencies and in the Judiciary of Kenya. He was also a Legal researcher in the Office of the Solicitor General, Kenya, for the Maritime Delimitation in the Indian Ocean (Somalia v. Kenya), a case that was before the International Court of Justice. His main areas of specialization include Public International Law, The Law of International Organizations, International Humanitarian Law, International and Regional (EAC) Refugee Law and Legal Policy Development. Further, Allan has been involved in various national and international legal consultancies and projects; he has published several peer reviewed legal articles, a legal monograph and presented several legal papers in international conferences around the world. He has also developed several policy documents for Strathmore University as well as (currently operational) manuals and laws for the operation of the Judiciary as well as governmental agencies and regional agencies such as IGAD.
ANDREA SANTACOLOMA Director
Andrea Santacoloma is a Panamanian lawyer that focuses her practice on international commercial arbitration.
Prior to joining Adell & Merizalde, Andrea was the Deputy Director for Latin America of the ICC International Court of Arbitration for 5 years. In this role, she gained vast experience in the internal functioning of the ICC’s Secretariat and Court and saw first-hand the work of hundreds of arbitrators and ICC Court Members in the region. Andrea was also in charge of identifying new opportunities and potential users of the ICC Dispute Resolution Services (ICC DRS) in Latin America, in liaison with the ICC National Committees and other institutions in the region. She also worked as a lawyer advising local and international clients on business and corporate law and M&A in 3 Panamanian law firms.
She is currently the Executive Director of the Latin American Arbitration Association (ALARB), one of Latin America’s leading associations gathering practitioners and arbitrators, which seeks to encourage the use of arbitration and foster initiatives for the development of international arbitration in the region.
In July 2022, the G
overning Council of the International Institute for the Unification of Private Law (UNIDROIT) appointed Andrea as a Correspondent for Latin America. Namely, Andrea was appointed as a Correspondent for the Republic of Panama for the period 2022-2025.
• American University Washington College of Law, LL.M. in International Arbitration and Business Law • International Training Centre of the International Labor Organization (ILO) jointly with the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL), Università degli Studi di Torino, and University Institute of European Studies (IUSE), LL.M. in International Trade Law & Dispute Resolution • Universidad Católica Santa María La Antigua, LL.M. in Corporate Law • Universidad Católica Santa María La Antigua, Degree in Law and Political Science • Centro de Estudios Regionales de Panamá, Diploma in Entrepreneurship and Management of Small and Medium Enterprises
Bar admissions Republic of Panama
Languages Spanish, English, Italian (intermediate)
[email protected] +507 370 4155
Lawyer and Notary Public dedicated to the area of corporate and international business law, founder of Iurisconsulti, Abogados y Notarios. Attorney-at-law and Notary Public with a Degree in Juridical and Social Sciences graduate from Francisco Marroquin University (Guatemala City, Guatemala). Masters of Law LL.M graduate from Columbia University (New York City). Arbitrator in several arbitrations carried out in Guatemalan arbitration centers and abroad. Professor of General Contract Theory, Commercial Contracts, and International Businness Law at the Faculty of Law of the Francisco Marroquín University. Expert witness in Guatemalan law in several cases before USA courts. Associate member of the International Academy of Comparative Law. Guatemalan expert appointed within the project of the Organization of American States (OAS) for the drafting of the “Guide on Applicable Law for International Commercial Contracts in the Americas” (2017). Guatemalan expert appointed within the Lucerna Project of the Hague Principles on the choice of applicable law in the field of International commercial contracts (2017). Guatemalan correspondent of the International Institute for the Unification of Private Law (UNIDROIT 2022). Member of the group that participated in the translation of the English version into Spanish of “Unidroit Principles on International Commercial Contracts”, Edited by the International Institute for the Unification of Private Law (Unidroit) Rome, Italy (2018). Observer in several meetings of the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale Of Goods, Advisory Counsel (CISG-AC) (2015-2022). Guatemalan delegate to the United Nations Commission for International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) (2014-2015; 2021-2022). Member of the group that worked in the drafting of the Principles of Latin American Contract Law (2015-2017). Full member of The Asociación Americana de Derecho Internacional Privado (American Association on Private International Law).
Doctor of Law, Professor at Private International Law Department of the Institute of International Relations of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. Oleksandr Biryukov successfully defended in Kyiv National University dissertations on Comparative Insolvency in 1999 and on Cross-Border Insolvency in 2010.
He is a proven legal consultant with extensive experience working in international projects in Ukraine funded by USAID, TACIS/European Commission, the World Bank, WTO, EBRD, DFID etc. He participated in drafting the Model Laws for CIS on Securities Market (1998-2000) and the Discussion paper in the frame of preparation of the Model law on Insolvency of Banks for CIS (2003-2004); was a member in the Governmental Delegation of Ukraine at Diplomatic conference convened in 2008 by Switzerland Confederation to discuss and adopt UNIDROIT Convention on Intermediated Securities (now is Geneva Securities Convention).
Dr. Biryukov is a bankruptcy specialist, scientist, consultant to the IMF (Ukraine, 2017-2018) and the World Bank (Kazakhstan, 2012-2018). Being a member to the World Bank Insolvency and Creditor/Debtor Regimes Task Force he was involved in preparation of the Report on the Treatment of the Insolvency of Natural Persons.
Prof. Biryukov teaches a number of private law university courses, including Private International Law, Bankruptcy, Cross-Border Insolvency, Comparative Securities Law and other.
He is a Fulbright Scholar (New York University School of Law, USA, 2000-2001). In 1996 Biryukov conducted a research at UNIDROIT and in 2009 received a grant from INSOL International to carry out research in the field of comparative and international bankruptcy.
He authored a number of publications, including a book Law and Legal System of Ukraine (JURIS Publishing Inc., 2005), a chapter Recent Bankruptcy Law Developments in Ukraine in Contemporary Issues on Public International and Comparative Law (Vandeplas Publishing Co., 2009), a brochure Research Guide to Ukrainian Law (NYU Globalex Journal, 2006), and more than 120 publications devoted to private law reform in Ukraine.
NAME: PROF. DR. HERNANY VEYTIA (LL.M. YALE) AFFILIATION DIRECTOR BNM-CAMBRIDGE STUDY CENTRE ON SUSTAINABLE INVESTMENTS PRESENTATION Professor of law, international strategic consultant, arbitrator, and entrepreneur. Hernany Veytia is very comfortable with complex, high-profile and confidential transactions. Her consulting experience as partner of BNM and Deloitte enables her to focus on and add value to the sustainable and commercial aspects of each deal. Frequently she leads transdisciplinary teams to deliver fact findings and legal opinions, feasibility studies and turn-key projects for banks, governments, international organisations, and corporations willing to expand or withdraw operations in other jurisdictions. In Prof Veytia’s experience UNIDROIT works have been very useful to understand not only the foreign law, but also to recognise the cultural, political, and economic factors at play, and the way national and international regulators operate-and cooperate. In her opinion, UNIDROIT instruments have been of utmost importance for the legal strategies she designed for: • DANPREIT (Dispute Analytics Platform for Real Estate Investment Trusts in the Agriculture, Construction and Mining industries). • TELEKAIROS, innovative methodology that incorporates the use of space assets. • Corporate art collections, restitutions, including donations, sponsorships, and loans to museums. • Contracts used by a German waterworks company willing to grow in all the Caribbean and Central American countries. • Liquidation of commercial and investment banks • IPOs and reverse mergers for companies in the extraction industries (Canadian stock exchange), ILS listed in Bermuda and African sovereign funds listed in London. • Franchising and other commercial contracts in the food & drinks, health, aero-space, and automotive industries. In the last three decades Prof. Veytia has lived, and successfully completed investments and disinvestments in more than forty countries in the five Continents. She is frequently appointed as arbitrator and invited as speaker on risk transfers at international industry conferences in fields of her expertise: energy (both renewable and traditional), artificial intelligence, infrastructure, mining, real estate, agriculture, rail, space, automotive, and franchising. She sits in the board of directors of companies in Europe including the United Kingdom.
Suzanne Howarth is an Australian legal practitioner admitted to legal practice in New South Wales, the Australian Capital Territory as well as in England and Wales. Suzanne holds undergraduate and graduate law degrees from the Universities of Sydney and Melbourne, is a graduate of the Australian Institute of Company Director and an accredited mediator.
Suzanne joined the Australian Public Service in 1992. Before joining the Service, Suzanne worked with two major law firms in Sydney and in the City of London in the areas of insurance, international trade, and dispute resolution.
Since 2020, Suzanne has been an Executive Member of the International Law Section of the Law Council of Australia. For over two decades, Suzanne has worked as a senior Australian Government lawyer in various Australian central government agencies as well as the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission. Suzanne’s areas of expertise include government and public administration, competition and consumer law, corporate law, public and international law, trade and investment, taxation, and the regulation of not for profits.
Juliana is a lecturer in Private International Law at the Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Her main areas of research and teaching are international trade law, European competition law and international family law. In relation to the former, she is the author of 3 monographs, one of them on “Régimen jurídico de la abogacía internacional” (2003), another on “Abordaje marítimo y litigación internacional” (2007) and the third one on “Contratos internacionales de distribución comercial en el Derecho Internacional Privado de la Unión Europea” (2013). She has also published on international factoring contracts, international insolvency and international commercial and investment arbitration. With regard to European competition law, she is co-author of the monograph “La doctrina de las infraestructuras esenciales en Derecho antitrust europeo” (2012) and has also written on other issues related to this subject, such as the influence of Big Data on anti-competitive behaviour. Finally, within the last line of research mentioned, she is the author of a fifth monograph on ” Relaciones económicas de los matrimonios y las uniones registradas en España, antes y después de los Reglamentos (UE) 2016/1103 y 2016/1104″ (2019) and has publications on international successions and free movement of persons, among other subjects. She has been Commissioner of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, European Union and Cooperation of the Government of Spain, as delegate of Spain at the 51st Session of UNCITRAL and is a Member of the European Association of Private International Law – EAPIL- and has been part of the working group of this association created to draft the future European Regulation on Real Rights. Her current research focuses on the legal issues raised by new technologies, including intellectual property rights in the metaverse and digital assets.
Maria Hook is an Associate Professor at the University of Otago (Faculty of Law). Her main area of expertise is private international law, particularly in the New Zealand context. She is a joint author of The Conflict of Laws in New Zealand (LexisNexis, 2020).
Dr. Radwa Elsaman’s area of expertise includes commercial law, international comparative law, international sustainable development and the rule of law. She focuses mainly on the MENA region. In addition to being an Assistant Professor of Law at Cairo University in Egypt, she has lectured and conducted academic research at prominent universities throughout the United States, such as Cornell University School of Law and Boston University School of Law, and the Central European University in Europe.
With 20 years of experience, Dr. Elsaman is well known for assisting governments and private sector entities with legal and institutional reform. She has consulted for USAID on projects, including Automating Economic Courts in Egypt and Economic Stabilization Support for Syria. With the IDLO, she advised on Strengthening the Capacity of National Partners in Economic Laws and Capacity Building of Jordanian judges. Similarly, she advised the European Investment Bank on Improving Access to Finance by Facilitating SMEs’ Business Expansion. Moreover, she acted as a legal expert at the EU Euromed Justice Project. With the World Bank Group, she consulted on land and property projects in MENA. She was also engaged with other organizations, including the GIZ and the AFD. Between 2006 and 2015, Dr. Elsaman worked for international law firms, including Dentons and DLA Piper, where she represented clients in regulatory and transactional matters.
Her publications have appeared in worldwide-law journals. Currently, she contributes to the Cambridge Handbook on Comparative Law. Her book on “Comparative Franchising Law: United States, China, Malaysia, MENA Region” has been chosen as one of the six best books on franchising globally. She is a member of various professional global unions and is licensed to practice law in multiple jurisdictions. She got her LL.B. from Cairo University School of Law; an LL.M. from the IMO’s International Maritime Law Institute, a second LL.M. and J.S.D (PhD in Law), from the American University Washington College of Law.
Stefan Vogenauer has been teaching an intensive masters course in ‘Global Commercial Contract Law’ as a Senior Research Fellow at the University of Melbourne since 2012. He also taught the BCL/MJur options ‘Transnational Commercial Law’ and ‘International Commercial Arbitration’ at the University of Oxford, where he served as Professor of Comparative Law and Director of the Institute of European and Comparative Law from 2003 to 2015. He has taught and lectured widely in many European countries and has held Visiting Professorships at NYU Law School, the University of Auckland, the University of Paris 2, the University of Texas at Austin, Louisiana State University, National Taiwan University and National Law University Delhi.
Apart from legal history, his main research interests are in comparative private law, contract law and transnational commercial law. He is an expert in contract law where he has worked extensively on national laws (English, French and German) and on comparative, European and transnational aspects. He is the sole editor of the Commentary on the UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts (PICC) (2nd edn, Oxford University Press 2015), a standard reference work in the field. He is also a co-author of the leading student textbook in comparative contract law, the Ius Commune Casebook for the Common Law of Europe: Cases, Materials and Text on Contract Law (3rd edn, Hart Publishing 2019). His co-authored monograph on contracts written in English but governed by another law (Englisch als Vertragssprache) was published with CH Beck in 2018.
From 2017, Professor Vogenauer served as a member of the panel of experts for the drafting of the ‘tripartite’ Legal Guide to Uniform Instruments in the Area of International Commercial Contracts, with a Focus on Sales, published jointly by UNCITRAL, the Hague Conference and UNIDROIT.
Prof. Amnon Lehavi (J.S.D, LL.M, Yale) is Full Professor at the Harry Radzyner Law School, Reichman University, Israel, and former Dean of the Law School (2016-2021). He acts as Academic Director of the G City Real Estate Institute at Reichman University. Prof. Lehavi is a member of UNIDROIT’s Exploratory Expert Group on “Private Art Collections: Orphan Objects.” He also served as Co-President of the Law Schools Global League (2018-2021). Prof. Lehavi was a visiting professor at the University of Toronto (Canada), University of California, Berkeley (USA), Tilburg University (the Netherlands), KU Leuven (Belgium), and Luiss University (Italy).
An expert on property law, urban law and policy, cultural property, international economic law, and law and globalization, Prof. Lehavi is the author of Property Law in a Globalizing World (Cambridge UP, 2019) and The Construction of Property: Norms, Institutions, Challenges (Cambridge UP, 2013), and the editor of Disruptive Technology, Legal Innovation, and the Future of Real Estate (Springer, 2020), One Hundred Years of Zoning and the Future of Cities (Springer, 2018), and Private Communities and Urban Governance: Theoretical and Comparative Perspectives (Springer, 2016).
Email: aleha[email protected]; Twitter: @Alehavi; ORCID iD: 0000-0002-7976-9546.
My areas of interest: I have been a member of the Working Group preparing the UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts 2010 and 2016. Apart from the law of obligations in comparative and historical perspective I am very interested in the law of succession, also in historical and comparative perspective. Today, in fact, the law of succession is the main focus of my work.
I discovered UNIDROIT’s work through the study on Transport Terminals [when writing on OTT UN Convention (1991)]. Afterwards the Principles on International Commercial Contracts (Chapter 6, within a volume devoted to the Principles under my coordination, and Chapter 9.1, in Bonell Fs). I directed (and still I am mentoring) Master’s and PhD students’ research to deep in documents ending up in ULIS, to get a better CISG understanding on different CISG Articles (e.g., 7, 25, 78 and 79). With a group of students, we translated to Spanish the Guide to International Master Franchise Arrangements 1st. edition. Lastly, with a group of University colleagues and other bank experts we sent comments on Model Law on Factoring and on Principles on Digital Assets within the last four months or so. Apart from UNIDROIT’s works, but on international trade law area, I have had the benefit to represent Spain in UNCITRAL (1989-2014). There, I chaired the Plenary (1994) and two working groups: NIEO (1993-1994, while drafting Model Law on Procurement of Goods, Construction and Services, 1994) and the one on International Contract Practices (1995-2001) during the Convention on Assignment of Receivables on International Trade (2001) preparation. I was member of the Spain Delegation in Working Group V, dealing with Insolvency Law (2001-2014), and Working Group III (2001-2008) when drafting Rotterdam Rules. Consequently, my publications are within that ambits. In Spanish Law I wrote on Companies, Commercial Registry, Loans (with particular attention to interests’ debt in it and in other credit contracts, also on lack of timely payment). I was granted (DAAD, A. v Humboldt S. and Salvador de Madariaga) to research periods (three years in a sum) in MPI (Hamburg). I coach my University students’ teams to Willem C Vis International Commercial Arbitration Moot and to MOOTmadrid.
Walter Doralt has his main research interests in Civil Law, European Private Law, and Company Law, with methods drawing on Comparative Law (Austria, Germany, England, France, Italy and Switzerland) as well as Law and Economics. His habilitation (Bucerius Law School) dealt with Long Term Contracts.
María Belén Moreno is an upcoming lawyer focusing on international commercial and investment arbitration cases. She works in the Dispute Resolution Department, mainly representing national and international clients in commercial arbitrations before the Centro de Arbitraje y Mediación Paraguay (CAMP), Paraguay’s only arbitration institution, and in ad hoc arbitration proceedings. Belén is a newly admitted member to the Arbitrator list of CIACBLP (Centro Internacional de Arbitraje – Cámara de Bélgica y Luxemburgo en el Perú). She was a part of the National University of Asuncion´s commercial arbitration moot team as an oralist, receiving an honorable mention at the Willem C. Vis International Commercial Arbitration Moot in 2015. Ever since, she has been coaching the University´s moot teams in the Latin America moot and the Willem C. Vis Moot. Belen has an LL.M. from Georgetown University and has graduated with academic honors as part of the Dean’s List 2020. She also earned a Certificate in International Arbitration and Dispute Resolution.
Fabián is a Senior Associate in the area of Litigation and Arbitration.
His practice focuses on Construction and Infrastructure Law, Public-Private Partnerships, Concessions, Public and Private International Law, Free Trade and Investment Treaties, International Contracting, Civil, Corporate, Administrative, and the resolution of disputes through Domestic and International Arbitration and Dispute Boards in the aforementioned areas of law. Fabián works on disputes related to the sectors and/or industries of construction and infrastructure, airports and ports, insurance, banking and finance, energy, and foreign investment.
Fabián has large experience advising and/or representing government agencies and companies in domestic and international arbitrations under different arbitration rules (ICC, UNCITRAL, LCIA, ICSID, etc.).
Fabián completed an internship at a law firm in Chile in the area of International Contracts and International Arbitration. He completed a period of training and academic research on the relationship between International Investment Arbitration and the law and jurisprudence of the World Trade Organization, specializing in non-discrimination clauses in both their substantive and procedural form in international economic law, at the Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law in Heidelberg, Germany as part of his LL.M.
Fabián is Arbitrator and Secretary of Arbitral Tribunal of the Conciliation and Arbitration Center of Tegucigalpa Chamber of Commerce and Industry. He is also Arbitrator of the Arbitration Center of México (CAM), Ibero-American Arbitration Center (CIAR), Institution for the Resolution of Disputes on Blockchain and Technology (IBT) and is part of the list of potential Arbitrators of the General Secretariat of the Madrid International Arbitration Center (CIAM). He has had experience for several years as a professor and participates regularly as a participant as well as speaker or lecturer in forums, colloquiums, training courses and international workshops on different subjects. He is fluent in Spanish, English and French. Basic knowledge of German (level A1 CEFR).
My main areas of expertise related to the work of UNIDROIT include international commercial contracts and secured transactions, as well as international civil procedure and private international law.
Dyalá Jiménez is a Costa Rican national who specializes in conflict resolution. She is frequently appointed as arbitrator in international treaty-based and contract-based disputes, both under institutional rules and ad hoc procedures. She is also trained in mediation by ICSID/CEDR and acts as conciliator in local complex disputes.
She is a member of the ICSID panel of conciliators and arbitrators for Costa Rica and of the ICC International Court of Arbitration. Dyalá is also a member of the International Council for Commercial Arbitration (ICCA) Governing Board.
In terms of her academic background, she is a Fulbright Scholar and alumnus of Georgetown University Law Center (LLM ‘99) and is author of numerous publications (visit www.djarbitraje.com). She has teaching experience in Costa Rica (Lead University, 2017) and in Chile (Universidad de Chile undergraduate and the Heidelberg/Universidad de Chile LLM Program, from 2004 to 2013). Dyalá is also the correspondent for Costa Rica of the International Institute for the Unification of Private Law, UNIDROIT.
From 2018 to 2020, Dyalá served as Minister of Foreign Trade of Costa Rica and in such capacity was charged with public policy on exports and foreign direct investment. In that role, she also led the country’s efforts to become the 38th member of the OECD, which included passing 14 laws of varied complexity and sensibility. During those two years Dyalá had to tackle a diversity of disputes including frictions with trade partners, obstacles in land transportation, challenges arising out of the Pandemic, strike on the ports, among others.
Dyalá is a member of the board of directors of Costa Rica’s investment promotion agency, CINDE, and served on the board of the local Chamber of Commerce.
Dyalá has lived in Washington, DC, Paris and Santiago (Chile) and works in Spanish, English, French and Portuguese.
Doctor of Law and Social Sciences, University of the Republic (1978); Professor of Private International Law at the University of the Republic (1984-) and at the Catholic University of Uruguay (1994-2017); Member of the Uruguayan Institute of Private International Law (1984-) and Director (2017-2021); Professor at the Uruguayan Centre of Judicial Studies (2017-). Visiting professor at several universities and institutions in foreign countries, professor at the Hague Academy of International Law (2015).
Author of 26 books and 175 chapters in books and articles published in Uruguay and abroad. Some of the main ones are La Autonomía de la Voluntad en la Contratación Internacional, Montevideo, FCU, 1991 (Thesis); Curso de Derecho del Transporte, Montevideo, coauthor Fernando Aguirre Ramírez, FCU, 8 volumes, several editions (1999-2011); Curso de Derecho Internacional Privado, Montevideo, FCU, 3 volumes, several editions (2001-2015); “Public Policy: Common Principles in the American States”, Recueil des cours, Vol. 379 (2016), Leiden/Boston, Brill Nijhoff, 2016, pp. 73-396; Legal Aspects of Cruises, Editor and author of the General Report, Ius Comparatum – Global Studies in Comparative Law, Volume 56, Switzerland, Springer, 2022; Derecho Internacional Privado. Parte General. Jurisdicción estatal y arbitral, Tomo I, 1st ed., Montevideo, FCU, 2022; Derecho Internacional Privado. Parte Especial Civil y Comercial, Tomo II, 1st ed., Montevideo, FCU, 2022; Derecho Internacional Privado. Parte Especial Civil y Comercial, Tomo III, 1st ed., Montevideo, FCU, 2022.
Lecturer and panelist in more than 150 seminars, conferences and workshops.
Research activities: Fulbright scholarship, University of California at Davis (1988); at UNIDROIT (1998); at the University of the Republic, Uruguay, and at foreign universities. Professional experience as external Consultant on Private International Law matters to several Uruguayan and foreign law firms and institutions and as arbitrator. Main areas of expertise related to the work of UNIDROIT: international contracts, international family law issues, cross border insolvency, international procedural issues, access to justice.
Mr Forrest is a Professor of Law and the Director of the Marine and Shipping Law Unit at the University of Queensland. He teaches maritime law, private international law and cultural heritage law and has a broad research interest in the unification of private maritime law. His most recent book is, with Professor Nick Gaskell, The Law of Wreck (2019, Informa Law). His current work involves UNIDROIT’S implementation of the Cape Town Convention on International Interests in Mobile Equipment, and particular, the possibility of adopting a Protocol addressing ships and maritime transport equipment. He also has an interest in cultural heritage and the current Private Art Collection’s project.
Professor Pilar Perales Viscasillas is the Chair of Commercial Law at Carlos III University of Madrid (UC3M). She acts as a national and international arbitration in commercial law disputes. Author of seven monographs in matters related to international sale of goods contracts, uniform law of international trade, commercial contract law, company law, insurance and arbitration, as well as more than 150 publications in collective and periodical works, several of them in English. Many of her publications relates to various Unidroit Legal instruments. Professor Perales Viscasillas is the current Chair of the CISG-AC (Advisory Council on the Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods) (2003) and Council Rapporteur of Opinion No. 4; she was an observer in the Working Group for the preparation of the third and fourth editions of the UNIDROIT Principles on International Commercial Contracts (2010 and 2016) (2007-2010 and 2017). She has been Spanish Delegate to the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL-UNCITRAL) (2001-2014) in Working Group II on International Commercial Arbitration, and Spanish correspondent for CLOUT (2002-2017). She participated in the working group that drafted The UNCITRAL, HCCH, and UNIDROIT, Legal Guide to uniform instruments in the area of international commercial contracts, with a focus on sales. Member of the Plenary of the Centro Internacional de Arbitraje de Madrid (CIAM) and Council member of The Spanish Club of Arbitration. Member of the Executive Board of SEAIDA (The Spanish Branch of AIDA, Association Internationale de Droit des Assurances). Co-Chair of the Cátedra de Derecho Empresarial Deloitte Legal.
She is also Director of the Moot Madrid , where usually UNIDROIT Legal texts are used; and co-Director of the Master on International Advocacy (UC3M).
Bernardo is a partner at Parra Rodríguez Abogados (Colombia) with more than 35 years of legal experience. Bernardo assists national and international clients in aviation regulatory matters, structured finance transactions, M&A operations, asset-based-financing, cross-border transactions and aircraft financing transactions under the Cape Town Convention.
Bernardo represents world-leading international airlines and financial institutions. His experience includes aircraft operating and financial leases, asset purchase and sale transactions, cross-border financing transactions, private placement transactions, secured loans and issuance of notes, among others.
Bernardo has also participated in some of the major M&A and financing transactions in Colombia, such as the financing of the Medellin Metro, the acquisition of Central, North and South Cerrejón, the acquisition of Bell South assets in Colombia, the establishment of Carrefour in Colombia and the first private placement abroad by the major Colombian airline, amongst others.
Furthermore, Bernardo is a member of the Aviation Working Group (“AWG”) legal panel and legal coordinator of the AWG Colombian National Contact Group.
Bernardo is a 1986 lawyer from Universidad de los Andes (Bogotá, Colombia). In 1988 he obtained an LL.M in International Business Law from London School of Economics and Political Science in London, England.
Edgardo Muñoz is a leading voice in the field of international business law as a member of Universidad Panamericana’s law faculty in Guadalajara, Mexico, from where he frequently contributes in specialized publications and discussion forums.
Besides his academic commitments, he practices in the area of international contracting and arbitration. He sits as arbitrator in international forums and represents clients in commercial and sport proceedings. He is a Member of the Court of Arbitration for Sports [CAS] and of the Appeal Tribunal of the International Gymnastics Federation.
Edgardo Muñoz is also a Member of the CISG Advisory Council and Correspondent of UNIDROIT in Mexico.
He received his Bachelor of Laws from Universidad Iberoamericana in Mexico, and Master of Laws degree (LLM) from University of Liverpool in the U.K. and a second Master of Laws degree (LL.M) University of California in Berkeley. His Doctor of Laws degree (PhD) suma cum laude is from University of Basel in Switzerland.
Dr Teresa Rodriguez de las Heras Ballell is an Associate Professor of Commercial Law at University Carlos III of Madrid, Spain.
She is currently an Academic Visitor at the University of Cambridge, and was Sir Roy Goode Scholar at UNIDROIT in 2021-2022. The topics addressed during these appointments have been: secured transactions, effective enforcement, and digital assets.
Asset-based finance and secured transactions, specially, the international legal harmonization instruments are one of her main areas of expertise with a significant level of specialization in the Cape Town Convention system. Within this remit, she was member of the Study Group for the MAC Protocol and delegate of Spain in the Diplomatic Conference, as well as an observer and a delegate of Spain at UNCITRAL for WG VI on secured transactions.
Digital law and technology-related private-law matters (platforms, AI, data, digital assets, algorithmic contracts) are her second area of primary research, expertise, and international experience. She is delegate of Spain at UNCITRAL WG IV on ecommerce (AI in international trade), and an Expert for UNCITRAL and UNIDROIT on digital economy projects. She is also member of the European Commission Expert Group on Liability and New Technologies, the EU Expert Group for the Observatory on Online Platform Economy, and the EU Expert Group on B2B Data Sharing and Cloud Computing. She is member of the European Law Institute (ELI) Executive Committee and Council and author of the ELI Guiding Principles on Automated Decision Making in Europe, 2022.
She is an arbitrator at the Madrid Court of Arbitration and the Spanish Court of Arbitration. She has acted as an arbitrator in a variety of commercial disputes, mostly financial agreements, and banking contracts, as well as commercial contracts in general (agency, distribution, service agreements). Besides, she held a European Central Bank scholarship to prepare a report on FinTech regulation. So, she is also specialized in financial regulation.
I discovered UNIDROIT’s work through the study on Transport Terminals (when writing on Operators of Transport Terminals UN Convention). Afterwards the Principles on International Commercial Contracts (Chapter 6, within a volume devoted to the Principles under my coordination, and Chapter 9.1, in Bonell Fs, as a sequel from Assignment of Receivables UN Convention publications). I directed (and still I am mentoring) Master’s and PhD students’ research to deep in different aspects of the documents ending up in ULIS, to get a better CISG understanding on different CISG Articles (e.g., 7, 25, 78 and 79). In that documentary precedents vein one of the PHD students is digging on the documents related to Hotel Keepers and Travel Agencies. With a group of students, we translated to Spanish the Guide to International Master Franchise Arrangements 1st. edition. Lastly, with a group of University colleagues and other bank experts we send comments on Model Law on Factoring and on Principles on Digital Assets within the last four months or so.
Mr. Alvaro Galindo is an International Counsel advising on dispute resolution matters, particularly those involving Latin American jurisdictions. Currently, he is the Dean of the Law School at Universidad de las Americas and partner at Carmigniani Perez Abogados. His practice focuses on disputes between sovereign states and state-owned entities and private companies. He has been recognized by The Legal 500 Latin America and was noted in this publication as “outstandingly intelligent” and for his “incomparable capacity for coordinating, planning, strategic assessment, and for his diplomatic approach”. He was as member of the international arbitration practice at Dechert LLP in Washington, D.C. He also served as the Director of the International Affairs and Arbitration Unit for the Republic of Ecuador’s Attorney General Office. He acted as a legal consultant for the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) in Washington, D.C., and as regional director for the Latin American Development Corporation, where he coordinated the committee in charge of drafting the Arbitration Law of Ecuador. Mr. Galindo has significant teaching experience in the areas of dispute resolution, international investment, and arbitration law. He has authored numerous publications and articles related to arbitration and international investment law. Currently, he is an Adjunct Professor at Georgetown University Law Center, with a course on Advanced Topics in International Investment Arbitration and Adjunct Professor of Practical Aspects of Arbitration (Spanish course) at American University Washington College of Law. Mr. Galindo has represented sovereign states in international and regional forums: the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, UNCTAD; the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, UNCITRAL. Member of the Court of the ICC International Court of Arbitration and arbitrator in various arbitration centers in Latin America. In September 2021, he was appointed to the list of arbitrators under the ICSID Convention.
Professor Mads Bryde Andersen (b. 1958) is a professor of private law at the Univer¬sity of Copenhagen. He is the author, or editor, of several books and articles in his field of contracts and obligations, intellectual property law and computer and high tech¬nology law. His authorship includes “Lærebog i Obligationsret I” (The law of Obligations, I, 5th edition, 2020), “Dansk Pensionsret” (Danish Pension Law, 2nd edition, 2017, with Jesper Mark), “Grund¬læggende aftaleret” (Basic Contract Law, 5th edition, 2021), “Enkelte transaktioner” (Commercial Transactions, 5th edition 2022), “Praktisk aftaleret” (Contract Law in Practice, 5th edition 2019), “Advokatretten” (The law of Advocates, 2nd edition, 2022, with Lars Lindencrone Petersen), “IT-retten” (The law of IT, 2nd edition, 2005) and “Ret og metode” (Legal Method, 2002). He has published numerous academic articles and anthologies. Since 2003 he has been the editor-in-chief of the most prestigious Danish legal periodical Ugeskrift for Retsvæsen, section B (The Weekly Law Report).
For a number of years Professor Andersen was the Danish delegation to UNCITRAL. From 1997 to 1998 he chaired the UNCITRAL working group on Electronic Commerce. He has been involved in a number of working groups within the OECD dealing with security and consumer issues of the information society and was the head of the Danish delegation during the OECD talks on encryption policy (1995-1996). From 2003 to 2012 he was co-chair and later chair of the Danish Guarantee Fund for Depositors and Investors.
Professor Andersen is a frequently used arbitrator in domestic and international arbitration matters and has been involved in more than 150 arbitration cases, either as chairperson, sole arbitrator or co-arbitrator.
Professor Andersen’s office address is:
UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN, FACULTY OF LAW KAREN BLIXENS PLADS 16 (6A-3-26) 2300 COPENHAGEN S Denmark Mobile Phone +45 4058 0925 E-mail [email protected]
Tim Schnabel served as the U.S. head of delegation for the negotiation of the UNIDROIT Principles on the Operation of Close-Out Netting Provisions, the initial work on the MAC Protocol to the Cape Town Convention, and the Preparatory Commission for the Space Protocol to the Cape Town Convention. He led U.S. participation in several UNCITRAL projects, including the Singapore Mediation Convention, the Mauritius Transparency Convention, the Model Law on Enterprise Group Insolvency, the Model Law on Recognition and Enforcement of Insolvency-Related Judgments, and the initial work on reform of investor-state dispute settlement. He also participated in the negotiation of the Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters. He now serves as the Executive Director of the Uniform Law Commission, which has worked within the United States since 1892 to draft and seek enactment of state legislation on topics for which uniformity of state law is useful and feasible. Uniform acts developed by the ULC, which have been enacted over 6,000 times by state legislatures, include the Uniform Commercial Code and hundreds of other acts related to real property, trusts and estates, family law, civil procedure, emerging technologies, unincorporated organizations, and other areas of law.
Ana Filipa Vrdoljak is the UNESCO Chair in International Law and Cultural Heritage and Professor of Law, University of Technology Sydney. She has taught international law, cultural heritage law, human rights law, and international humanitarian law in Europe, Asia and Oceania, the Americas, and Middle East. She has been Fernand Braudel Senior Fellow (2017), Marie Curie Fellow (2006-2008) and Jean Monnet Fellow (2004-2006), Law Department European University Institute, Florence. She holds a Doctor of Philosophy (in Law) from the University of Sydney.
Professor Vrdoljak is the author of International Law, Museums and the Return of Cultural Objects (Cambridge University Press, 1e 2006 and 2008, 2e forthcoming) and editor of Oxford Handbook on International Cultural Heritage Law with Francesco Francioni (Oxford University Press 2020), and Oxford Commentary on the 1970 UNESCO and 1995 UNIDROIT Conventions with Andrzej Jakubowski and Alessandro Chechi (Oxford University Press, forthcoming 2023). She is a General Editor, with Francesco Francioni, of the Oxford Commentaries on International Cultural Heritage Law (Oxford University Press) and book series, Cultural Heritage Law and Policy (Oxford University Press). She is President of the International Cultural Property Society (U.S.) and Chair of the Management Committee, International Journal of Cultural Property (Cambridge University Press).
Professor Vrdoljak is a member of UNIDROIT’s 1995 UNIDROIT Convention Academic Project (UCAP) and member of the UNIDROIT Export Group on Orphan Works. She is a member of UNESCO Expert Group preparing Model Provisions for the 1970 UNESCO Convention. She has served on expert panels for UNESCO, UNIDROIT, European Commission and the OHCHR. She has been a member of the ILA’s Cultural Heritage Committee since 2008. She has been a Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court and Federal Courts of Australia since 1997, and Supreme Court of New South Wales since 1992.
Petra is a German and New Zealand qualified lawyer. Her main areas of research are international commercial law, in particular international commercial contracts and international dispute resolution, and human rights. Currently she focuses especially on access to commercial justice issues and issues in relation to cross-border contracting by MSMEs. Petra is a law reform specialist. She has, inter alia, lead two Commonwealth projects: an inquiry into judicial diversity in Commonwealth small states and regarding international commercial arbitration in the Commonwealth. She is also the director of the Institute of Small and Micro States. The aim of the Institute is to provide a platform for research and law reform regarding issues pertinent to small states.
Anna Veneziano is the Deputy Secretary General of the International Institute for the Unification of Private Law (UNIDROIT). She is a Professor of Comparative Law at the University of Teramo, Italy, where she was formerly the Director of the Department of Private Law. She has also formerly been a tenured Professor of European Property Law at the University of Amsterdam (UvA). Her education includes a Law Degree with honours from the University of Rome La Sapienza, an LL.M degree from the Yale Law School funded by a Fulbright scholarship, and a PhD degree from the University of Florence (Italy).
Her main research and publication areas are on secured transactions as well as international, comparative, and European contract and sales law. Before joining UNIDROIT she was a member of the Italian delegation with respect to the Cape Town Convention on International Interests on Mobile Equipment and its Aircraft Protocol as well as its Space Protocol. She was also a member of the Study Group on a European Civil Code and of the Compilation and Redaction Group on a Draft Common Frame of Reference on European Private Law (DCFR), and of the restricted Expert Group set up by the European Commission on a common European law on sales.
Amongst other accolades to his professional experience, Professor Tirado is a founding member of the European Banking Institute, an International Fellow of the American College of Bankruptcy and has been Director and Academic Co-Chair of the International Insolvency Institute.
Myrte Thijssen started her career in the Legal Service of the Dutch Central Bank (Supervision and Regulation Department). From 2015-19 she worked in the Legal Service of the Single Resolution Board, providing advice in banking crises and dealing with litigation before the Appeal Panel and the Court of Justice of the European Union. She studied at the University of Amsterdam and New York University. She has taught Corporate Law and Law of Bank Crisis Management at the University of Amsterdam and the University of Bologna respectively. She has published several articles in the field of banking and financial law with a particular focus on bank resolution.
Hamza Hameed is a Pakistani lawyer who works as a Legal Consultant at the International Institute for the Unification of Private Law (UNIDROIT) in Rome, Italy. He is also the Co-Chair of the Space Generation Advisory Council (SGAC). He holds an Advanced Master’s LLM Degree in Air and Space Law from Leiden University and an LLB from the University of London. His work mostly involves the development and promotion of international instruments in the areas of spacecraft financing, secured transactions law, and law & technology. At UNIDROIT, he is responsible for the Space Protocol of the Cape Town Convention, and also manages the activities of the Cape Town Convention Academic Project and the UNIDROIT Foundation. He is a member of the International Institute of Space Law (IISL) and INSOL International.
Prior to joining UNIDROIT, Michelle worked in the Department of Justice of Hong Kong, China, for over 10 years, advising and representing Hong Kong, China in various aspects of international law. Prior to that she worked in an international law firm, assisting leading companies and financial institutions in complex disputes. She has an LLB from the University of Hong Kong and LLM from New York University.