The ACICA was selected as the arbitral institution in at least 3 international case(s) known by Jus Mundi (3 Commercial Arbitration). None of these cases are pending.
The ACICA has adopted to date 4 rules and 0 other documents available on Jus Mundi.
Jus Mundi’s algorithms detected 5 arbitration practitioners who acted as arbitrators, counsel or experts in cases administered by this institution.
- EBJ21 and EBN21 v. EBO21 and EBP21, Order of the Federal Court of Australia  FCA 1406, 14 May 2020
Go Premium to unlock all institution analytics
The full access includes metrics on Status of Case, Role, Tribunal/Court/Institution, Applicable Treaty, Economic Sector.GO PREMIUM
List of Cases (3)
Unlock the list of cases - Go Premium
|Date||Case||Type of Case||Status||Economic sector||Rules||Seat of Arbitration||Applicable Law||Applicable Treaty|
|2020||Premium||Commercial Arbitration||Premium||Information and communication||ACICA Arbitration Rules incorporating the Emergency Arbitrator Provisions 2016||Sydney||Australia||Unknown|
|2016||Premium||Commercial Arbitration||Premium||Financial and insurance activities, Wholesale and retail trade; repair of motor vehicles and motorcycles||ACICA Arbitration Rules incorporating the Emergency Arbitrator Provisions 2016||Sydney||Australia||Unknown|
|2014||Premium||Commercial Arbitration||Premium||Unknown||Unknown||Sydney||Hong Kong SAR China||Unknown|
The analytics displayed herein are based on the information collected by Jus Mundi. The information Jus Mundi relies on is by no means exhaustive and does not in any way presume the other activities of this profile.
For any questions relating to the publishing of a decision/award/document, write to us at email@example.com.