Assessment Brief

Academic Year 2023-2024

Semester 2

Module Number LLM228

Module Title Arbitration Law, Practice and Procedure

Assessment Method Coursework – presentation

Deadline (time and date) 21 March 2024 at 1pm (UK time)

Assessment Dropbox in the Module Study Area in

Submission
CampusMoodle (full instructions provided)

Time Limit This is a presentation: time limit is 15 minutes

Module Co-ordinator David Christie

What knowledge and/or skills will I develop by undertaking the assessment?

One of the best ways to learn something or work out if you have learned something is

through explaining your analysis. Moreover, the ability to present and argue is a key skill in

arbitration. Accordingly, the arbitration presentation assessment helps to do both. It will

ensure that you have understood the underlying principles of arbitration in depth – and to

have a grasp of how those principles translate into law and that you are able to explain

them.

Accordingly, students will demonstrate knowledge of

- the nature of arbitration law and the key issues within that framework;

- the key practical impacts of arbitration law in practice.

Students will demonstrate skills in

- Identifying and describing law/legal principles such as how to find and summarise the

law relevant to the sort of issues that regularly arise in international arbitration;

- Critical evaluation skills as they apply in international and domestic arbitration;

- Legal reasoning and analysis: the answer requires more than simply saying what the

Date created: Aug 2022

Version: 2
What knowledge and/or skills will I develop by undertaking the assessment?
law is – that needs to be tested and explained;

- Legal presentation skills: how to formulate and articulate legal issues arising from

arbitration;

- Legal Research: getting in behind the initial assumptions of the law to investigate and

test its merits.

On successful completion of the assessment students will be able to achieve the

following Learning Outcomes:

1. Critically analyse the various institutional and ad hoc rules available for the conduct of UK

and international arbitration.

2. Demonstrate in the context of an arbitral dispute a professional standard of case

management, inter-personal skills, and an ability to creatively apply procedural norms.

3. Develop skills of oral advocacy including presentation skills, addressing the tribunal in an

appropriate and professional manner.

Please also refer to the Module Descriptor available from the module Moodle study

area.

What is expected of me in this assessment?

Task(s) - content
Students should prepare a 15-minute recorded video presentation in line with this brief and

upload it onto Moodle. Instructions on the technical requirements for the recorded

presentation will be posted Moodle.

Introduction
This presentation should be done in a formal way and specifically in the context of a

submission within the arbitration context. This report should be critically evaluative of the

laws within the framework of the exercise. That means it should take a balanced evaluation

of the position, which goes beyond simply explaining the law and setting out pros and cons,

into the situation where those pros and cons are weighed, and the student preferences set

Date created: Aug 2022

Version: 2
What is expected of me in this assessment?
out, with reasoning. Critical evaluation requires more than criticism.

While the exercise focuses on particular aspects of arbitration law, the wider context of

those aspects will need to be fully understood. These will be the materials provided in the

first five topics. The analysis will need to draw widely from that.

Students should be comfortable with the relevant law of arbitration. Key relevant aspects of

arbitration practice relevant to this assessment will also be covered in these first topics

(including some guidance on communication). Consideration of the Law Commission of

England and Wales’ analysis of arbitration will also be relevant and there will be some

material provided on that too. This will in any event provide useful supplemental

understanding of the module material.

Students should also engage in the topic activities and with the materials to gain the wider

knowledge of arbitration law required and to develop the necessary skills. The topic

activities, in particular, will have helped in developing the skills of communicating and

analysing arbitration law. There is also guidance given in the feedback to those activities

which will explain and promote the exercise of reflective thinking which will help in the

second part of the assessment.

Support materials on the presentation aspect are on Moodle, as are materials on the

process of creating and uploading your presentation.

Task(s) - content
Bearyal Energy Ltd. (‘Bearyal’), a leading wind farm operator in Scotland, has a long-term

service contract with Clannish Dynamics Ltd (‘Clannish’). Clannish then subcontracted part

of their maintenance obligations to MacTarnish Engineering Services LLP (‘MacTarnish’).

The service contract between Bearyal and Clannish, as well as the subcontract between

Clannish and MacTarnish, are both governed by English law and include arbitration clauses

stating that disputes will be resolved following the CIArb Arbitration Rules 2015, with the

exception of the appointment process which is to be governed in accordance with the

Date created: Aug 2022

Version: 2
What is expected of me in this assessment?
Arbitration Act 1996.

Substandard service by MacTarnish resulted in significant downtime for the wind farm,

prompting Bearyal to claim £12M in damages from Clannish under the arbitration clause in

their contract. Clannish settled this claim for £5M.

Subsequently, Clannish initiated arbitration proceedings against MacTarnish, citing the

latter's inadequate services.

The parties are unable to agree an arbitrator but eventually (following due legal processes)

Charles King KC is appointed. Charles is well known and highly regarded in renewable

energy arbitrations (a relatively small specialism). He has spoken and networked at

seminars with all of the parties involved in the arbitration and hosted the commercial

managers of Bearyal, MacTarnish and Clannish (among others) to a dinner to mark fifteen

years of commercial wind farm construction.

Two issues arise in the early stages of the arbitration, ahead of the case management

conference.

Firstly, a significant concern arises when MacTarnish discovers - after the appointment -

that Charles King KC has undisclosed financial interests in a company that is a major

competitor of Bearyal. MacTarnish say that such a finding brings into the question of

Charles King KC’s impartiality and independence. MacTarnish accordingly object to his

appointment saying that this is a serious issue (i.e., conflict of interest).

Secondly, the claim includes the £5M settlement paid to Bearyal, which Clannish allege

resulted from MacTarnish's deficient maintenance processes (along with other smaller

claims). Clannish are seeking to recover this settlement on an interim basis as they are out

of pocket. In doing so, they rely on indemnity clauses within their contract with MacTarnish.

This indemnity allows for any reasonable settlement to be reclaimed.

On this point, MacTarnish insists that Clannish provide detailed records and documents

from the Bearyal/Clannish arbitration, arguing that such information is critical to evaluate

the reasonableness of Clannish's £5M claim. MacTarnish suspects that Clannish may have

agreed to an excessive settlement, assuming the cost could simply be transferred to

Date created: Aug 2022

Version: 2
What is expected of me in this assessment?
MacTarnish through their subsequent claim.

Clannish refuses, citing the confidentiality of the arbitration proceedings with Bearyal.

Before the case management conference, MacTarnish submit a formal request within the

process. Firstly, the seek to have Charles King KC removed as arbitrator and secondly, in the

alternative (and reserving their position in respect of Charles King’s position) they request

the arbitrator's permission to seek a court order for the disclosure of the Bearyal/Clannish

arbitration documents. They contend that without this information, Clannish's case is

baseless, and the ongoing arbitration should be terminated. Clannish opposes both the

disclosure and the proposal to terminate the arbitration. The arbitrator indicates that these

matters will be discussed at the case management conference and that the standard

agenda will be deferred until these particular issues are addressed (unless the parties wish

to raise any related points pertinent to the substantive issues).

Task:
The fifteen minute video presentation submission should be in two parts as follows

Part 1:
Based upon the scenario described above, choose to represent either MacTarnish or

Clannish. Prepare a 10-minute oral submission to the arbitrator for the case management

conference, advocating for your selected party's stance. Your submission should articulate

arguments supporting your client's position while also recognising and challenging any

potential weaknesses. It should be supported by relevant references to authority and

explain the procedural and legal basis for the steps which are to be taken. You should also

set out the consequences of your arguments being successful in terms of the progression

of the dispute.

Part 2:
In addition, please prepare a 5-minute presentation for the examiner reflecting on the steps

you took to prepare for the submission in Part 1 including the research undertaken, the

Date created: Aug 2022

Version: 2
What is expected of me in this assessment?
thinking behind particular elements of the submission and the style and approach you

adopted. You should also outline the research undertaken with specific examples.

Both parts should be included within one 15 minute long submission. You should
clearly identify each part in your submission.
The recording link for submissions should be added to the designated dropbox on
Moodle by the stipulated deadline (with technical submission details provided on
Moodle).
The presentation should solely consist of the student addressing the camera without
the use of visual aids such as PowerPoint presentations.

How will I be graded?

A grade will be provided for each criterion on the feedback grid which is specific to the assessment.

The overall grade for the assessment will be calculated using the algorithm below.

At least 50% of the feedback grid to be at Grade A, at least 75% of the feedback grid to be at
A
Grade B or better, and normally 100% of the feedback grid to be at Grade C or better.

At least 50% of the feedback grid to be at Grade B or better, at least 75% of the feedback grid to
B
be at Grade C or better, and normally 100% of the feedback grid to be at Grade D or better.

At least 50% of the feedback grid to be at Grade C or better, and at least 75% of the feedback
C
grid to be at Grade D or better.

At least 50% of the feedback grid to be at Grade D or better, and at least 75% of the feedback
D
grid to be at Grade E or better.

E At least 50% of the feedback grid to be at Grade E or better.

F Failing to achieve at least 50% of the feedback grid to be at Grade E or better.

NS Non-submission.

Date created: Aug 2022

Version: 2
Feedback grid
GRADE A B C D E F
DEFINITION / EXCELLENT COMMENDABLE/VERY GOOD GOOD SATISFACTORY BORDERLINE FAIL UNSATISFACTORY
CRITERIA Outstanding Meritorious Highly Competent Competent Fail
(WEIGHTING) Performance Performance Performance Performance
Excellent introduction Very good introduction clearly Good introduction setting Satisfactory introduction Attempted to introduce Introduction and/or
INTRODUCTION clearly outlining: (i) the outlining: (i) the matters to be out the matters to be which may set out the and/or conclude the conclusion (if present)
& CONCLUSION matters to be addressed addressed in the addressed in the main matters to be presentation but did not were confused and/or
in the presentation, (ii) presentation, (ii) the context presentation and the addressed in the do so in a clear or inaccurate.
(10 %) the context and (iii) the and (iii) the structure of the structure of the presentation and the effective manner.
structure of the presentation, in a logical presentation reasonably structure but lacks clarity No conclusions drawn
Grade:
presentation, in a logical sequence. clear explanation of and logical sequence.
Unclear where from the points presented
sequence. outline, context and presentation begins in the presentation.
Very good conclusion structure. and/or ends. No valid and
Excellent conclusion summarising points made Satisfactory conclusion logical conclusions drawn
summarising points made and bringing the presentation Good conclusion summarising points made from the points presented
and bringing the to a clear end. Valid and summarising points made and bringing the in the presentation.
presentation to a clear logical conclusions drawn and bringing the presentation to an end.
end. Valid and logical from the points presented in presentation to an end. Limited valid and logical
conclusions drawn from the presentation. Some valid and logical conclusions drawn from
the points made in the conclusions drawn from the points presented in
presentation. the points presented in the presentation.
the presentation.

Excellent structure, which Very good structure, which is Good structure, which is Satisfactory structure, Structure lacks clarity, Presentation is unclear
STRUCTURE is clear, logical and easy clear, logical and easy to largely clear, logical and which is reasonably clear, logical sequencing and is and appears to be
to follow. follow. easy to follow. logical and easy to follow. not easy to follow. unstructured.
(10 %)
Used techniques such as At times sought to use Attempted to use Use of techniques such as Little use of techniques to No use of techniques to
Grade:
signposting, reiteration of techniques such as techniques such as signposting, reiteration of give presentation clarity give presentation clarity
key points, and signposting, reiteration of key signposting, reiteration of key points, and of structure. of structure.
foreshadowing to give points, and foreshadowing to key points, and foreshadowing to give
presentation extra clarity give presentation extra clarity foreshadowing but presentation clarity of

Date created: Aug 2022

Version: 2
 GRADE A B C D E F
DEFINITION / EXCELLENT COMMENDABLE/VERY GOOD GOOD SATISFACTORY BORDERLINE FAIL UNSATISFACTORY
CRITERIA Outstanding Meritorious Highly Competent Competent Fail
(WEIGHTING) Performance Performance Performance Performance

of structure. of structure. presentation lacks some structure are sporadic or

clarity of structure. used inconsistently.
Excellent level of content, Very good level of content, Good level of content, Satisfactory level of Level of content, accuracy, Level of content, accuracy,
CONTENT & accuracy, and accuracy, and explanation. accuracy, and explanation. content, accuracy, and and explanation and explanation very
TIMING explanation. explanation. insufficient. poor.
The theme or topic of the The theme or topic of
(30 %) presentation was very well the presentation was The theme or topic of The theme or topic was The theme or topic was
The theme or topic of
developed. well developed. the presentation was not adequately under-developed.
Grade: the presentation was
satisfactorily developed developed.
fully developed. Very poor knowledge of
Very good knowledge of Good knowledge of but could have been
Knowledge of subject subject matter (or
subject matter (and evidence subject matter (and significantly expanded
Excellent knowledge of matter (and evidence of evidence of research if
of research if relevant). evidence of research if upon.
subject matter (and research if relevant) was relevant).
relevant).
evidence of research if poor.
Very good time management
Satisfactory knowledge of Very poor time
relevant). (adheres to allocated time Good time management
subject matter (and Poor time management management (no
limit well with minimal (broadly adheres to time
evidence of research if (presentation is adherence to time limits).
Excellent time deviation). limit but may be
relevant) but there was a excessively lengthy or
somewhat under or over
management. wide scope for further short).
the allocated time limits).
information to be
conveyed.

Time management was

mostly satisfactory
(Mostly adheres to time
limit but is quite well over
or under the allocated
time limits).
Excellent delivery: Very good delivery: Good delivery: Satisfactory delivery: Poor delivery: Very poor delivery:
DELIVERY presentation was clear, presentation was clear, presentation was presentation was mostly presentation was not presentation was very
confident, fluid and well- confident, fluid and well- reasonably clear, clear, confident and fluid clear, characterised by a unclear, characterised by
(30 %) confident, fluid and well- although lacking in some lack of confidence in a severe lack of
paced. Tone, diction, paced. Tone, diction, pitch
paced. Tone, diction, pitch elements. performance. confidence in
pitch and audibility were and audibility were very
and audibility were good. performance.

Date created: Aug 2022

Version: 2
 GRADE A B C D E F
DEFINITION / EXCELLENT COMMENDABLE/VERY GOOD GOOD SATISFACTORY BORDERLINE FAIL UNSATISFACTORY
CRITERIA Outstanding Meritorious Highly Competent Competent Fail
(WEIGHTING) Performance Performance Performance Performance
excellent. good. Some minor errors in There were some Many inconsistencies in Many inconsistencies in
delivery (e.g. inappropriate Some inconsistencies in inconsistencies in the the tone, diction, pitch. the tone, diction and
Excellent engagement tone, diction, pitch or pace). tone, pitch, or diction. tone, pitch, diction or pitch.
with audience/listener, audibility. The pace was
built a rapport Very good engagement with Pace was mainly inappropriate. Audibility was very poor.
immediately and audience/listener, built a appropriate. Pace was mainly
maintained eye contact rapport quickly and satisfactory. Poor engagement with The pace was very poor.
throughout. maintained eye contact Good engagement with audience/listener,
throughout. audience/listener, Satisfactory engagement rapport building and/or Very poor engagement
Dealt with any questions attempted to build a with audience/listener, eye contact were largely with audience/listener,
in an excellent manner. Dealt with any questions very rapport and maintained rapport building and/or absent. rapport building and/or
well. eye contact most of the eye contact were Any questions were eye contact were absent.
time. sporadic or used poorly dealt with. Any questions were not
Any questions were well inconsistently. addressed or very poorly
dealt with (but may not Any questions were dealt with.
have been satisfactorily dealt with
comprehensively (but answers were
answered). lacking in key respects).

Critical self-evaluation Very good self-evaluation Adequate self-evaluation Basic self-evaluation Minimal self-evaluation Inadequate self-
REFECTION demonstrating a showing a clear awareness with an understanding of indicating limited insight with scant insight into the evaluation. Reflection fails
comprehensive of the learning journey and the learning process and into the learning process. learning process or case to demonstrate
(20 %) case development. Reflects on the development. Reflection understanding of the
understanding of one’s case development. Reflects
Reflects on the preparation and source on preparation is learning process, the use
own learning process well on the preparation
Grade: preparation strategy and materials without deep superficial, with little of source materials, or the
and the development of approach, source materials, source materials used, analysis of the strategy mention of source rationale behind the
one’s case. Insightful and presentation strategy, with a general sense of rationale. Identifies few materials or the rationale presentation strategy.
reflection on the with an identification of the rationale behind the strengths and some behind the strategy, Lacks clear thought on
preparation strategy, major strengths and some presentation and weaknesses, with an focusing on the end result preparation, strengths, or
including the source weaknesses. identification of some emphasis on the result without significant areas of development.
materials used and the strengths and areas rather than the analysis of strengths or
needing improvement. preparation process. weaknesses.
rationale behind the

Date created: Aug 2022

Version: 2
 GRADE A B C D E F
DEFINITION / EXCELLENT COMMENDABLE/VERY GOOD GOOD SATISFACTORY BORDERLINE FAIL UNSATISFACTORY
CRITERIA Outstanding Meritorious Highly Competent Competent Fail
(WEIGHTING) Performance Performance Performance Performance
presentation strategy,
identifying both
strengths and areas for
improvement.

Coursework received late, without valid reason, will be regarded as a non-submission (NS) and one of your assessment opportunities will be lost.

Date created: Aug 2022

Version: 2
What else is important to my assessment?
What is plagiarism?
“Plagiarism is the practice of presenting the thoughts, writings or other output of another or others as

original, without acknowledgement of their source(s) at the point of their use in the student’s work. All

materials including text, data, diagrams or other illustrations used to support a piece of work, whether

from a printed publication or from electronic media, should be appropriately identified and

referenced and should not normally be copied directly unless as an acknowledged quotation. Text,

opinions or ideas translated into the words of the individual student should in all cases acknowledge

the original source” (RGU 2022).

What is collusion?
“Collusion is defined as two or more people working together with the intention of deceiving another.

Within the academic environment this can occur when students work with others on an assignment,

or part of an assignment, that is intended to be completed separately“ (RGU 2022).

For further information please see Academic Integrity.

What is the Assessment Word Limit Statement?

It is important that you adhere to the Word Limit (Time Limit) specified above. There may be a penalty

for exceeding the upper limit.

What if I’m unable to submit?

 The University operates a Fit to Sit Policy which means that if you undertake an assessment then

you are declaring yourself well enough to do so.

 If you require an extension, you should complete and submit a Coursework Extension Form. This

form is available on the RGU Student and Applicant Forms page.

 Further support is available from your Course Leader.

What additional support is available?

 RGU Study Skills provide advice and guidance on academic writing, study skills, maths and

statistics and basic IT.

 RGU Library guidance on referencing and citing .

 The Inclusion Centre: Disability & Dyslexia.

 Your Module Coordinator and Course Leader can also provide support.

Date created: Aug 2022

Version: 2
What else is important to my assessment?
What are the University rules on assessment?
The University Regulation ‘A4: Assessment and Recommendations of Assessment Boards‘ sets out

important information about assessment and how it is conducted across the University.

Date created: Aug 2022

Version: 2