The World Is Not Enough*: ethics in arbitration seen through the world of film

Abstract

Abstract This article starts from the playful premise that if James Bond practiced law, it would be international arbitration. The article uses the 007 metaphor and the titles of James Bond films to examine the ethical challenges that confront various actors in international arbitration. The article argues that arbitration practitioners—as they tend to the needs of their clients, their organizations, their institutions, and their own professional goals—should look beyond their most immediate, short-term self-interest so their case does not become the billboard for some endemic problem or controversy in international arbitration. A modicum of foresight might have altered outcomes in some of arbitration's most disruptive cases and sensational cases—HEP v. Slovenia, Yukos, Einser, and RSM v. St. Lucia. The article concludes with a QUANTUM OF SOLACE—those professionals active in international arbitration have it within their power and have demonstrated a collective impulse to address problems through a determined self-reassessment and internal recalibration. In conclusion, it calls on international arbitration practitioners to make that collective impulse an express commitment, at TOMORROW NEVER DIES.