Showing papers by "Jones Day published in 2002"

The Lawlessness of Arbitration

Abstract: This Essay identifies and analyzes the problems that may arise when insurance coverage disputes are subject to mandatory, binding arbitration. We argue that arbitration often involves a form of contractual "lawlessness" that is especially undesirable in claims that involve new legal issues. This lawlessness not only adversely affects the parties to each dispute, but the legal system as a whole. As a consequence, in our view insurance policyholders should be reluctant to purchase policies that require binding arbitration of coverage disputes. In addition, since the problems that we identify are likely to arise not only in insurance, where new, cutting-edge issues have regularly emerged for decades, but also in other kinds of disputes posing new legal issues, the legal system should reconsider the highly favorable stance that it takes toward mandatory, binding arbitration in general, so as to take account of the negative effects of arbitration lawlessness. A neutral legal and judicial stance toward binding arbitration would be more appropriate.

Energy procurement in a deregulating United States ‐ Part 2: Key considerations and criteria in long‐term energy commitments

Abstract: The advent of retail deregulation (liberalisation) in the United States electricity markets provides the major energy users, for the first time, significant choice in energy procurement. With choice comes responsibility for sorting the wide range of potential services, associated risks and variables in price. As deregulation has progressed, the emerging market has not yet reached maturity for retail customers, resulting in significant price volatility and imbalances in supply in some regions. This paper, presented in the Journal in two parts, of which this is the second, explains the fundamentals of energy choice for commercial and industrial energy users and the criteria to be considered in making long‐term energy commitments.

Selected insurance and lease issues to consider after the terrorist attacks of 11th September, 2001

Abstract: The 11th September terrorist attacks on America continue to affect the corporate real estate industry, and this paper is intended to address a number of those ongoing effects. It first discusses property insurance coverage in general and then proceeds to analyse whether damage from acts of terrorism is covered under pre‐11th September and post‐11th September property insurance polices. It also addresses the current status of proposed US Government intervention as a terrorism insurance backstop. It then describes the strategies which certain clients located within the areas directly affected by the terrorist attacks implemented in order to be able to gain immediate access to alternative space. Finally it examines selected lease clauses to which landlords and tenants should pay closer attention in light of the terrorist attacks, including operating expense provisions, force majeure provisions, waiver of subrogation provisions, use prohibitions and alteration provisions.