No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Valuing Women as Counsel in International Adjudication
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 March 2018
Extract
At the outset, it is helpful to draw a distinction between interstate disputes—those at the ICJ and that are administered by some other institutions—and other forms of international arbitration. The reality is that there are relatively few interstate cases. At the moment, there are perhaps a dozen active cases on the docket of the ICJ. That is a relatively full docket for the ICJ, although it has been at that level for a few years now. The Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) in its 2015 Annual Report stated that it was administering eight interstate cases. So a good guess of the maximum number of interstate cases that are currently active is perhaps twenty-five.
- Type
- Valuing Women in International Adjudication
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © by The American Society of International Law 2018
References
1 See International Court of Justice, Pending Cases: Currently Being Heard or Under Deliberation, at http://www.icj-cij.org/en/pending-cases (visited June 27, 2017) (highlighting the fifteen state-to-state disputes pending cases before the International Court of Justice as of June 27, 2017).
2 Permanent Court of Arbitration, 2015—115th Annual Report 20–21 (2015), at https://pca-cpa.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/175/2016/10/PCA-annual-report-2015.pdf.
3 World Bank, The ICSID Caseload: Statistics (Issue 2016-1), 7–8 (2016) (as of December 31, 2015), at https://icsid.worldbank.org/apps/icsidweb/resources/pages/icsid-caseload-statistics.aspx. Forty-two cases were filed under the ICSID Convention, five cases were Additional-Facility cases, and one was an ICSID Convention Conciliation. Id.
4 World Bank, The ICSID Caseload: Statistics (Issue 2017-1), 7–8 (2017) (as of Dec. 31, 2016), at https://icsid.worldbank.org/apps/icsidweb/resources/pages/icsid-caseload-statistics.aspx. Fifty cases were ICSID Convention cases and two were Additional-Facility cases. Id.
5 See, e.g., Kumar, Shashank & Rose, Cecily, A Study of Lawyers Appearing Before the International Court of Justice 1999–2012, 25 Eur. J. Int'l L. 893, 894–95 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
6 Id. at 904.
7 See Am. Bar Ass'n, A Current Glance at Women in the Law 1, 2 (2016).
8 Solicitors Regulation Authority, How Diverse Are Law Firms? (2015), at http://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/diversity-toolkit/diverse-law-firms.page.
9 The Bar Council: Snapshot: The Experience of Self-Employed Women at the Bar 9 (2015), at http://www.barcouncil.org.uk/media/379529/snapshot_-_the_experience_of_self_employed_women_at_the_bar.pdf (observing that, in 1995, of 6,398 practicing barristers, 1,525 (23.83 percent) were women).
10 See Bar Standards Board, Practising Barrister Statistics: Data Spreadsheet 2010–2015, at https://www.barstandardsboard.org.uk/media-centre/research-and-statistics/statistics/practising-barrister-statistics/ (visited June 28, 2017) (reflecting that, in 2014, women (n = 5,545) represented 35.3 percent of all practicing barristers (n = 15,716).
11 See Bar Standards Board, Called to the Bar Statistics: Data Spreadsheet 2010–2015, at https://www.barstandardsboard.org.uk/media-centre/research-and-statistics/statistics/called-to-the-bar-statistics/ (visited June 28, 2017) (observing that, in 2015, women (n = 207) composed 13.2 percent of all barristers receiving the designation of Queen's Counsel (n = 1,574)); see also id. (reflecting that, in 2010, women (n = 247) represented 13.6 percent of barristers receiving the Q.C. (n = 1,820)).
12 See Bar Standards Board, Queen's Counsel Statistics: Data Spreadsheet 2010–2015, at https://www.barstandardsboard.org.uk/media-centre/research-and-statistics/statistics/queen's-counsel-statistics/ (visited June 28, 2017) (observing that, in 2010, women (n = 832) represented 51.1 percent of all barristers called to the bar (n = 1,627)); see also id. (reflecting that, in 2014, women (n = 577) represented 48.8 percent of all barristers called to the bar (n = 1,183)).
13 In a different context, see Am. Bar Foundation, First Chairs at Trial: More Women Need Seats at the Table—A Research Report on the Participation of Women Lawyers as Lead Counsel and Trial Counsel in Litigation (2015), at https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/marketing/women/first_chairs2015.authcheckdam.pdf (reflecting that women in U.S.-based civil litigation were also involved in dispute settlement but tended not to be lead counsel).
14 Anna Jaffe, Grace Chediak, Erika Douglas & Mackenzie Tudor, Retaining and Advancing Women in National Law Firms, Stanford Law School Women in Law Policy Lab Practicum 1, 4, 6–8 (May 2016), at https://law.stanford.edu/publications/retaining-and-advancing-women-in-national-law-firms/. This study was written by students at Stanford Law School.
15 Id. at 16–24.
16 Id. at 11–16.
17 Id. at 31–35.
18 Id. at 354–36.