Legal Guidance and Research / Experts / Andrew Bennett
Andrew Bennett#13759

Andrew Bennett

Baker McKenzie
Andrew is a Senior Lawyer with Senior Leadership, Culture Change, and Project Management experience. He currently works in the Knowledge team of Baker McKenzie, specialising in research, training, and legal updates for the Dispute Resolution (encompassing Arbitration) and Investigations, Compliance and Ethics teams. He is also heavily involved in creating, testing, and introducing efficiency savings and quality improvements through Generative AI.
For almost 9 years, Andrew was a member of the senior management team of the Allen & Overy Belfast office (Advanced Delivery Legal), specialising in the handling of international arbitration and banking disputes, and working with offices around the A&O worldwide network. Andrew had a particular focus on Legal Technology and was Head of LegalTech for the Belfast contentious disputes and investigations team.
Before Allen & Overy, Andrew worked in one of UK's leading corporate criminal/health and safety/regulatory legal teams at Eversheds Sutherland where he advised and represented corporate clients going through regulatory authority and Police investigations, prosecutions, Coroner Inquests and criminal trials following deaths or serious injuries at work. Andrew was also seconded to work on two substantial public inquiries.

Practice Area

Panel

  • Contributing Author

Qualified Year

  • 2008

Experience

  • Allen & Overy (now A&O Shearman) (2015 - 2023)
  • Eversheds (now Eversheds Sutherland) (2006 - 2015)

Membership

  • Law Society of England & Wales
  • Law Society of Northern Ireland

Qualifications

  • LLB (2005)
  • Legal Practice Course (2006)

Education

  • Durham University (2005)
  • Northumbria University (2006)

1 Contributions by Andrew Bennett

Comparative guide to investor–state arbitration rules: key features and procedural contrasts across ICSID, UNCITRAL, PCA, SIAC, SCC and CIETAC
PRACTICE NOTES
Comparative guide to investor–state arbitration rules: key features and procedural contrasts across ICSID, UNCITRAL, PCA, SIAC, SCC and CIETAC
Investment treaty disputes can proceed according to the procedures of numerous institutions or on an ad hoc basis. Every forum or organisation applies its own set of provisions, each bringing particular advantages and potential pitfalls. The table below offers a concise point of reference to the investment arbitration frameworks of several prominent bodies: the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC), the Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (SCC), the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL), China International Economic Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC) and the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA). It is a broad-brush summary highlighting where key institutional and ad hoc international arbitration rules align and diverge. It is not a replacement for tailored legal counsel on the procedures and governing laws applicable to a specific case. Expert guidance should be obtained when consenting to arbitration and as soon as a disagreement arises. Securing advice promptly can help navigate procedures and governing laws. Quick reference guide table SIAC Investment Arbitration Rules 2017 SCC Rules 2023 ICSID Convention 1966 and ICSID Arbitration Rules 2022 UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules 2021 PCA Arbitration Rules 2012 CIETAC International Investment Arbitration Rules 2017 Nature...
Arbitration
Expert page AD
If you expected to see yourself on this page, click here.