Afghanistan
All primary courts of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan are the relevant court(s) for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention.
Argentina
The Argentine Republic declares that all competent courts of the Argentine Republic, as determined in accordance with the laws and regulations of the judicial system of the Argentine Republic, are the relevant courts for the purposes of Article 1(h) and Chapter XII of this Convention.
The original version of this declaration was submitted in Spanish
Australia
The Government of Australia declares that, in accordance with Article 53, the following courts are the relevant courts for the purposes of Article l and Chapter XII of the Convention: the Federal Court of Australia; the Supreme Court of New South Wales; the Supreme Court of Victoria; the Supreme Court of Queensland; the Supreme Court of South Australia; the Supreme Court of Western Australia; the Supreme Court of Tasmania; the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory; the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory; and the Supreme Court of Norfolk Island.
Bangladesh
The People’s Republic of Bangladesh declares that The Supreme Court of Bangladesh is the relevant Court of Bangladesh under the CTC} for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention.
Brazil
The Federative Republic of Brazil declares that all of the competent courts of the Federative Republic of Brazil, as determined in accordance with the laws and regulations of the judicial system of the Federative Republic of Brazil, are the relevant court(s) for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of this Convention.
Cameroon
The Republic of Cameroon declares that the competent civil courts under the legislation of Cameroon governing the organisation of the courts are competent for the purposes of the application of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention.
Canada
At the time of ratification – The Government of Canada declares, in accordance with Article 53 of the Convention, that for all matters within federal jurisdiction, the superior courts of the provinces and territories are the relevant courts for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention.
The Government of Canada also declares, in accordance with Article 53 of the Convention, that the following courts are the relevant courts for all matters within provincial and territorial jurisdiction for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention: in Alberta – the Court of Queen’s Bench; in British Columbia – the Supreme Court; in Manitoba – the Court of Queen’s Bench; in Newfoundland and Labrador – the Supreme Court, Trial Division; in the Northwest Territories – the Supreme Court; in Nova Scotia – the Supreme Court; in Nunavut – the Nunavut Court of Justice; in Ontario – the Superior Court of Justice; in Quebec – the Superior Court; and in Saskatchewan – the Court of Queen’s Bench.
As from 1 October 2014, by virtue of a subsequent declaration, the Government of Canada declares, in accordance with Article 53 of the Convention, that, for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention, in Prince Edward Island the Supreme Court of Prince Edward Island is the relevant court for all matters within provincial jurisdiction and in Yukon the Supreme Court of Yukon is the relevant court for all matters within territorial.
As from 1 July 2016, by virtue of a subsequent declaration, the Government of Canada declares, in accordance with Article 53 of the Convention, that, for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention, in New Brunswick the Court of Queen’s Bench of New Brunswick is the relevant court for all matters within provincial jurisdiction.
Cape Verde
Form No. 11 (Declaration under Article 53)
The Republic of Cape Verde declares that all courts with competent jurisdiction under the laws of Cape Verde are the relevant courts for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention.
China
5. Declaration under Article 53 of the Convention: The intermediate people’s courts where the headquarters of relevant airlines of the PRC are located have jurisdictions over aircraft equipment leasing disputes covered by the Convention.
Congo
The Republic of Congo declares that the Congolese courts are the relevant courts for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention.
Costa Rica
Declaration under Article 53
The Government of the Republic of Costa Rica considers that the ordinary courts constitutionally established by law shall have the authority to hear and determine any dispute arising between the contracting parties or, failing that, the arbitration mechanism at the option of the same parties.
Côte d’Ivoire
Article 53
The Republic of Côte d’Ivoire declares that the courts of Côte d’Ivoire are the relevant courts for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention.
[This declaration was notified to UNIDROIT by the Government of the Republic of Côte d’Ivoire as subsequent declaration pursuant to Article 57(1) of the Convention, on 12 June 2019, and in accordance with Article 57(2) of the Convention, this subsequent declaration took effect on 1 January 2020.]
Cyprus
Article 53
The Republic of Cyprus declares that the District courts of the Republic of Cyprus, are the relevant courts for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention
Democratic Republic of the Congo
Article 53
The Democratic Republic of the Congo declares that the Congolese courts and tribunals are competent for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention.
Egypt
The Arab Republic of Egypt declares that, in accordance with Article 53 of the Convention, the Egyptians Courts shall be competent inside the territory of the Arab Republic of Egypt regarding the implementation of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention.
[This declaration was notified to UNIDROIT by the Government of the Arab Republic of Egypt, as a subsequent declaration pursuant to Article 57(1) of the Convention, on 7 November 2019, and in accordance with Article 57(2) of the Convention took effect on 1 June 2020.]
The original version of this declaration was submitted in Arabic
Ghana
Article 53
The Republic of Ghana declares that the High Court of the Republic of Ghana is the relevant court for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention.
Iceland
Declaration under Article 53
Pursuant to Article 53 of the Convention, Iceland declares that the District Court of Reykjavik (Héraðsdómur Reykjavíkur) is the relevant court for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention.
India
(v) Form No. 11 (Declaration under Article 53)
All the High Courts within their respective territorial jurisdiction are the relevant courts for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention.
Indonesia
Indonesia declares that [all] courts with the competent jurisdiction under the laws of Indonesia are the relevant courts for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention.
Kazakhstan
Form No. 11 (Declaration under Article 53)
The Republic of Kazakhstan declares that relevant courts for purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention shall be all courts of the Republic of Kazakhstan that have jurisdiction over the relevant dispute in accordance with the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
[This declaration was notified to UNIDROIT by the Republic of Kazakhstan, as a subsequent declaration pursuant to Article 57(1) of the Convention, on 16 November 2012, and in accordance with Article 57(2) of the Convention it took effect on 1 June 2013.
See text of the previous declaration below.
[On 15 March 2011 the Republic of Kazakhstan notified UNIDROIT, pursuant to Article 57(1) of the Convention, of the making of this subsequent declaration. In accordance with Article 57(2) of the Convention, this subsequent declaration took effect on 1 October 2011.
On 16 November 2012 the Republic of Kazakhstan notified UNIDROIT, pursuant to Article 58(1) of the Convention, of the withdrawal of its subsequent declaration made on 15 March 2011. The withdrawal took effect on 1 June 2013.
Form No. 11 (Declaration under Article 53)
Courts of primary jurisdictions within their territorial jurisdiction are the relevant court(s) for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention.]
Kenya
Kenya declares that, The High Court of Kenya and the Court of Appeal of Kenya are the relevant court(s) for the purposes of Article (1) and chapter XII of the convention.
Kyrgyzstan
Declaration under Article 53 of the Convention
The Kyrgyz Republic declares that the relevant courts for the purposes of article 1 and Chapter II of the Convention are all courts of the Kyrgyz Republic that have jurisdiction over the relevant dispute in accordance with the legislation of the Kyrgyz Republic.
Luxembourg
The Grand-Duchy of Luxembourg makes the following declarations without prejudice to the future exercise by the European Community of its competencies:
– pursuant to Article 53 of the Convention, the Grand-Duchy of Luxembourg declares that the courts and tribunals with competence by virtue of applicable Luxembourg legislation relating to judicial organisation are competent for the purpose of the application of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Cape Town Convention;
Madagascar
Form No. 11 (Declaration under Article 53)
The Republic of Madagascar declares that the Malagasy courts and tribunals are competent for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention.
Malawi
Form No. 11 (Declaration under Article 53)
The Republic of Malawi declares that, the High Court of Malawi and the Supreme Court of Appeal of Malawi are the relevant courts for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention.
Malaysia
Malaysia declares that all courts with competent jurisdiction under the laws of Malaysia are the relevant courts for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention.
Malta
Pursuant to Article 53 of the Convention, it is declared that the First Hall of the Civil Court is the relevant court for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention.
Mexico
For the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention, the relevant courts will be the courts legally constituted and invested with the Mexican Judicial Power.
Mongolia
Mongolia declares that all courts with competent jurisdiction under the laws of Mongolia are the relevant court for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention.
Myanmar
(iv) Form No. 11 (Declaration under Article 53)
The courts Kyauktada Township Court, Yangon Divisional Court are the relevant courts for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention.
Netherlands
Pursuant to Article 53 of the Convention, the Kingdom of the Netherlands declares that the Netherlands Antilles and Aruba courts and tribunals with competence by virtue of the Netherlands Antilles and Aruba legislation relating to judicial organization are competent for the purpose of the application of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention.
New Zealand
New Zealand declares, in accordance with Article 53, that the following courts are the relevant courts for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention:
the High Court, with right of appeal to the Court of Appeal and to the Supreme Court with leave of that Court.
Nigeria
The Federal Republic of Nigeria declares that the Federal High Court established under Section 249 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 is the relevant court for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention.
[This declaration was notified to UNIDROIT by the Federal Republic of Nigeria, as a subsequent declaration pursuant to Article 57(1) of the Convention, on 26 March 2007, and in accordance with Article 57(2) of the Convention it took effect on 1 October 2007.]
Oman
All primary courts are the relevant court(s) for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention.
Pakistan
Pakistan declares that the following court(s):
The High Court of Balochistan;
The Lahore High Court;
The Peshawar High Court; and
The High Court of Sindh
Within their respective territorial jurisdiction, are the relevant court(s) for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention.
Panama
As to Article 53 of the Convention, in accordance with the internal laws of the Republic of Panama, the relevant courts are as follows:
– ordinary courts;
– administrative courts;
– the civil aviation authority;
– those advisory bodies exercising supervisory functions in respect of financial institutions and insurance companies (superintendencias);
– arbitral tribunals,
subject to the powers vested in them by the internal laws of the Republic of Panama.
Paraguay
With respect to Article 53:
The Republic of Paraguay declares that all of the competent courts of the Republic of Paraguay, as determined in accordance with the laws and regulations of the Paraguayan Judicial System, are the relevant court(s) for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of this Convention.
Qatar
Form No. 11 (declarations under Article 53):
The State of Qatar declares that the primary courts are “total courts” and considers the courts concerned for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Agreement.
Russian Federation
Pursuant to Article 53 of the Convention, the Russian Federation declares that any dispute relating to the Convention and Protocol is to be resolved by the arbitration courts of the Russian Federation.
Rwanda
The Commercial Court and The Commercial High Court are the relevant court(s) for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention.
San Marino
Declaration under Article 53
Pursuant Article 53 of the Convention, the Republic of San Marino declares that the Single Court of the Republic of San Marino is the relevant court for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention.
Senegal
The Republic of Senegal declares that the Senegalese courts are the relevant courts for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention.
Sierra Leone
Declaration under Article 53
The Republic of Sierra Leone declares that, the High Court of the Republic of Sierra Leone is the relevant court for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention.
Singapore
Form No. 11 (Declaration under Article 53)
Singapore declares that the High Court of the Republic of Singapore is the relevant court for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention.
Spain
Declaration pursuant to Article 53:
The Kingdom of Spain declares that the all courts and competent authorities in accordance with the laws of the Kingdom of Spain will be the relevant courts for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention.
[On 27 November 2015, the Government of the Kingdom of Spain notified to UNIDROIT, pursuant to Article 57(1) of the Convention, of the making of a subsequent declaration and in accordance with Article 57(2) of the Convention, this subsequent declaration took effect on 1 June 2016.]
The original version of this declaration was submitted in Spanish
Togo
Declaration pursuant to Article 53
The Togolese Republic declares that the Togolese courts are the relevant courts for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention.
[This declaration was notified to UNIDROIT by the Republic of Togo, as a subsequent declaration pursuant to Article 57(1) of the Convention, on 26 September 2011, and in accordance with Article 57(2) of the Convention it took effect on 1 April 2012.]
Uganda
Declaration pursuant to Article 53
The Republic of Uganda declares that, the HightCourt of the Republic of Uganda and the Court of Appeal of the Republic of Uganda are the relevant court(s) for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention.
[This declaration, deposited on 11 October 2024, will enter into force on 1 February 2025]
Ukraine
For the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of this Convention the relevant “courts” are the courts of general jurisdiction.
United Arab Emirates
The United Arab Emirates declares that all primary courts within their respective territorial jurisdictions are the relevant court(s) for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention.
United Kingdom
At the time of ratification – Pursuant to Article 53 of the Convention, the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland declares that the following courts are the relevant courts for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention: the High Court of Justice in England and Wales, the Court of Session in Scotland, the High Court of Justice in Northern Ireland, the Supreme Court of Gibraltar, the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands and the Royal Court of Guernsey.
As from 1 January 2018, by virtue of subsequent declarations, the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland declares, pursuant to Articles 52(4) and 53 of the Convention, that, in Bermuda the relevant “court” for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention is the Supreme Court of Bermuda and that in the Isle of Man the relevant court for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention is the High Court of Justice of the Isle of Man.
Uzbekistan
Pursuant Article 53 of the Convention, the Republic of Uzbekistan declares that the economic courts of the Republic of Karakalpakstan, regions and city of Tashkent are the relevant courts for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention.
Viet Nam
The Socialist Republic of Viet Nam declares that the People’s Court at Provincial level are the relevant court(s) for the purposes of Article 1 and Chapter XII of the Convention.
Professor Iacopo Donati is the UNIDROIT/Bank of Italy Chair Holder and is mainly responsible for assisting in the Bank Insolvency project. He is Professor of Corporate and Insolvency Law at the University of Siena, and coordinates the research project ‘Pro.Re.Ba.’ (Proportionating rules on bank crisis prevention and management to the case of retail banks), which has received funding from the Italian Ministry of University. He has previously taught corporate law at the University of Venice ‘Ca’ Foscari’, at the University of Florence and at the University of Rome ‘Tor Vergata’.
Professor Donati is the author of several publications on corporate law, restructuring, insolvency law, and bank crisis management. On the same topics, he has been invited as a speaker to various international and national conferences and participated in some high-impact international, European, and national research projects. Professor Donati’s education includes a Ph.D. in Corporate Law (University of Rome ‘La Sapienza’), an LLM in Corporate Governance (Stanford Law School), and a Law Degree with honors (University of Florence). He is qualified as an attorney in Italy and in the State of New York (USA).
Ms Olga Fonotova is an Associate Professor of the Faculty of Law (Department of Legal Regulation of Business) at the Russian National Research University “Higher School of Economics” in Moscow. She holds a PhD degree cum laude in private law / private international law from the Lomonosov Moscow State University (2006). Her academic and teaching interests cover private international law, international and national commercial law, with a focus on unified and non-state legal regulation of cross-border commerce.
Olga is a Russian law qualified practicing lawyer in the sphere of national and international commercial and corporate law with 20+ years’ experience in leading law firms. As part of her legal practice, she has advised multinational corporations on the setting up of multi-jurisdictional commercial relations, on the formation / termination of international joint ventures, restructuring of assets, and financing / refinancing of projects. For her work on commercial and corporate legal matters she was included in the international rating of leading lawyers “The Best Lawyers® in Russia” (2018 – 2022).
She is a UNIDROIT alumna (2011) and a Correspondent of UNIDROIT in Russia (2023 – 2025). From 2016 to 2021 Olga was a member of the ICC Commission on Commercial Law and Practice (ICC CLP) and a member of the Association of European Business (AEB) in Moscow.
Allan M. Mukuki, PhD Candidate (Navarra, Spain), LLM (Groningen, Netherlands), PGDip (KSL), LLB (Hons) (UoN), ACIArb (London), Advocate of the High Court of Kenya.
Allan Mukuki is an Advocate of the High Court of Kenya as well as a Commissioner for Oaths. He is presently a PhD Candidate at the University of Navarra in Spain. He is also a holder of an LL.M in International Law and the Law of International Organizations, from the University of Groningen in the Netherlands. He has an LL. B (Hons) from the University of Nairobi, he is a Member of the Cha
rtered Institute of Arbitrators (London). He further holds a post-graduate diploma in law from the Kenya School of Law. Allan is also a scholar from the Hague Academy of International Law.
Some of his many roles in the legal profession include Director of International Partnerships; a Doctoral Fellow; member of the Management Committee and moot court coordinator, all for Strathmore Law School; Research Fellow for the African Region (Kenya), for the European Research Council Grant Project on the interpretation of customary international law; and Acting Director for the Strathmore Institute of Advanced Studies in International Criminal Justice (SIASIC)
Allan has previously worked at A.F Gross Advocate; in various legal institutes; in governmental agencies and in the Judiciary of Kenya. He was also a Legal researcher in the Office of the Solicitor General, Kenya, for the Maritime Delimitation in the Indian Ocean (Somalia v. Kenya), a case that was before the International Court of Justice. His main areas of specialization include Public International Law, The Law of International Organizations, International Humanitarian Law, International and Regional (EAC) Refugee Law and Legal Policy Development.
Further, Allan has been involved in various national and international legal consultancies and projects; he has published several peer reviewed legal articles, a legal monograph and presented several legal papers in international conferences around the world. He has also developed several policy documents for Strathmore University as well as (currently operational) manuals and laws for the operation of the Judiciary as well as governmental agencies and regional agencies such as IGAD.
ANDREA SANTACOLOMA
Director
PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
Andrea Santacoloma is a Panamanian lawyer that focuses her practice on international commercial arbitration.
Prior to joining Adell & Merizalde, Andrea was the Deputy Director for Latin America of the ICC International Court of Arbitration for 5 years. In this role, she gained vast experience in the internal functioning of the ICC’s Secretariat and Court and saw first-hand the work of hundreds of arbitrators and ICC Court Members in the region. Andrea was also in charge of identifying new opportunities and potential users of the ICC Dispute Resolution Services (ICC DRS) in Latin America, in liaison with the ICC National Committees and other institutions in the region. She also worked as a lawyer advising local and international clients on business and corporate law and M&A in 3 Panamanian law firms.
She is currently the Executive Director of the Latin American Arbitration Association (ALARB), one of Latin America’s leading associations gathering practitioners and arbitrators, which seeks to encourage the use of arbitration and foster initiatives for the development of international arbitration in the region.
In July 2022, the G
overning Council of the International Institute for the Unification of Private Law (UNIDROIT) appointed Andrea as a Correspondent for Latin America. Namely, Andrea was appointed as a Correspondent for the Republic of Panama for the period 2022-2025.
EDUCATION
• American University Washington College of Law, LL.M. in International Arbitration and Business Law
• International Training Centre of the International Labor Organization (ILO) jointly with the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL), Università degli Studi di Torino, and University Institute of European Studies (IUSE), LL.M. in International Trade Law & Dispute Resolution
• Universidad Católica Santa María La Antigua, LL.M. in Corporate Law
• Universidad Católica Santa María La Antigua, Degree in Law and Political Science
• Centro de Estudios Regionales de Panamá, Diploma in Entrepreneurship and Management of Small and Medium Enterprises
Bar admissions
Republic of Panama
Languages
Spanish, English, Italian (intermediate)
asantacoloma@adellmerizalde.com
+507 370 4155
NAME: PROF. DR. HERNANY VEYTIA (LL.M. YALE)
AFFILIATION DIRECTOR BNM-CAMBRIDGE STUDY CENTRE ON SUSTAINABLE INVESTMENTS
PRESENTATION
Professor of law, international strategic consultant, arbitrator, and entrepreneur. Hernany Veytia is very comfortable with complex, high-profile and confidential transactions. Her consulting experience as partner of BNM and Deloitte enables her to focus on and add value to the sustainable and commercial aspects of each deal. Frequently she leads transdisciplinary teams to deliver fact findings and legal opinions, feasibility studies and turn-key projects for banks, governments, international organisations, and corporations willing to expand or withdraw operations in other jurisdictions.
In Prof Veytia’s experience UNIDROIT works have been very useful to understand not only the foreign law, but also to recognise the cultural, political, and economic factors at play, and the way national and international regulators operate-and cooperate. In her opinion, UNIDROIT instruments have been of utmost importance for the legal strategies she designed for:
• DANPREIT (Dispute Analytics Platform for Real Estate Investment Trusts in the Agriculture, Construction and Mining industries).
• TELEKAIROS, innovative methodology that incorporates the use of space assets.
• Corporate art collections, restitutions, including donations, sponsorships, and loans to museums.
• Contracts used by a German waterworks company willing to grow in all the Caribbean and Central American countries.
• Liquidation of commercial and investment banks
• IPOs and reverse mergers for companies in the extraction industries (Canadian stock exchange), ILS listed in Bermuda and African sovereign funds listed in London.
• Franchising and other commercial contracts in the food & drinks, health, aero-space, and automotive industries.
In the last three decades Prof. Veytia has lived, and successfully completed investments and disinvestments in more than forty countries in the five Continents. She is frequently appointed as arbitrator and invited as speaker on risk transfers at international industry conferences in fields of her expertise: energy (both renewable and traditional), artificial intelligence, infrastructure, mining, real estate, agriculture, rail, space, automotive, and franchising. She sits in the board of directors of companies in Europe including the United Kingdom.
Anna Veneziano is the Deputy Secretary General of the International Institute for the Unification of Private Law (UNIDROIT). She is a Professor of Comparative Law at the University of Teramo, Italy, where she was formerly the Director of the Department of Private Law. She has also formerly been a tenured Professor of European Property Law at the University of Amsterdam (UvA). Her education includes a Law Degree with honours from the University of Rome La Sapienza, an LL.M degree from the Yale Law School funded by a Fulbright scholarship, and a PhD degree from the University of Florence (Italy).
Her main research and publication areas are on secured transactions as well as international, comparative, and European contract and sales law. Before joining UNIDROIT she was a member of the Italian delegation with respect to the Cape Town Convention on International Interests on Mobile Equipment and its Aircraft Protocol as well as its Space Protocol. She was also a member of the Study Group on a European Civil Code and of the Compilation and Redaction Group on a Draft Common Frame of Reference on European Private Law (DCFR), and of the restricted Expert Group set up by the European Commission on a common European law on sales.
P
rofessor Ignacio Tirado was appointed Secretary-General by the Governing Council at its 97th session, and officially took office on 27 August 2018. A national of Spain, Professor Tirado (Commercial, Corporate and Insolvency Law, Universidad Autónoma of Madrid, Spain) holds a PhD from the Universities of Bologna and Autónoma de Madrid and an LLM from the University of London. Professor Tirado has been a Senior Legal Consultant at the World Bank’s Legal Vice-Presidency and Financial Sector Practice for more than nine years, having also consulted for the IMF on insolvency related matters as well as for the Asian Development Bank on commercial legal reform.
Amongst other accolades to his professional experience, Professor Tirado is a founding member of the European Banking Institute, an International Fellow of the American College of Bankruptcy and has been Director and Academic Co-Chair of the International Insolvency Institute.
A Swedish national, Ms Lena Peters grew up in Italy where she attended an English school. In 1978 she took her Juris Kandidatexamen at Stockholm University followed by a Master of Laws from King’s College, London (1979). Since 1985 she has been with UNIDROIT, first as Research Officer, lastly as Principal Legal Officer, her main duties being Secretary to the Working Group for the Preparation of Principles of International Commercial Contracts, Secretary to the Study Group on Franchising, Secretary to the Committee of Governmental Experts on Franchising.She also collaborated on the project for the preparation of the ELI-Unidroit Model European Rules of Civil Procedure. She is currently Managing Editor of the Uniform Law Review and responsible for publications at UNIDROIT.
Marina Schneider is Principal Legal Officer and Treaty Depositary at UNIDROIT. She studied law at the University of Strasbourg (France) and Paris I – Panthéon Sorbonne. She joined the UNIDROIT in 1987 and was involved in the elaboration and French versions of most UNIDROIT instruments since. She is in charge of the 1995 UNIDROIT Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects and of the UNESCO-UNIDROIT Model Provisions on State Ownership of Undiscovered Cultural Objects. She is the author of the Explanatory Report of the 1995 Convention and many articles on the Convention and other international instruments in the field. Ms Schneider is also responsible for the project on private collections and for the UNIDROIT Convention Academic Project (UCAP). She is member of the Board of the International Society for Research on Art and Cultural Heritage Law (ISCHAL).
Professor of Commercial Law, Carlos III University of Madrid. Currently, Sir Roy Goode Scholar at UNIDROIT, Rome, 2021-2022. Chair of Excellence 2017-2018 at University of Oxford (Uc3m- Santander Program), affiliated to Harris Manchester College. Previously Distinguished Visiting Professor and fellow of a number of Academic Institutions. Arbitrator of Madrid Court of Arbitration. Member of ELI (European Law Institute) Council and Executive Committee. Member of the Expert Group of the European Commission on Liability and New Technologies and member of the Expert Group of the European Observatory of Platform Economy; the International Academy of Commercial and Consumer Law; the expert group of the Inclusive Global Legal Innovation Platform for Online Dispute Resolution – UNCITRAL and Hong Kong Department of Justice. Expert of the UNIDROIT Study Group on the MAC Protocol of the Cape Town Convention on International Interests. Delegate of Spain to UNIDROIT for the adoption of the Protocol, delegate of Spain in Working Group VI of UNCITRAL on secured transactions and in Working Group IV on Electronic Commerce. Member of UNIDROIT Working Groups on Enforcement and Warehouse Receipts.
William Brydie-Watson is an Australian lawyer who specialises in secured transactions law and private international law. Before joining UNIDROIT, William was a government lawyer in the Private International Law and International Arbitration section of the Australian Attorney-General’s Department, where he worked primarily on treaty negotiation and the implementation of private international law treaties in Australia. At UNIDROIT, he is primarily responsible for the implementation of the Mining, Agriculture and Construction (MAC Protocol) to the 2001 Cape Town Convention on International Interests in Mobile Equipment and the development of a Model Law on Factoring. William also serves as UNIDROIT’s liaison with the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum and as manager of the Institute’s Scholarship and Internship Programme. Admitted to practice in New South Wales and the High Court of Australia, he has a Bachelor of Arts (honours), a Bachelor of Laws and a Master of Laws from the Australian National University. William also lectures on International Secured Transactions Law at the Eotvos Lorand Faculty of Law in Budapest.
