Chad Purdie is representing SFL
MIAMI (Legal Newsline) – A Miami law firm is hoping a federal judge will affirm the arbitration award it earned against a former client it says didn’t pay its bills.
Sanchez Fischer Levine filed its petition Jan. 20, hoping to force BDT Investments to pay the $81,000 award reached in arbitration in October. The Barbados-based company hired the firm in 2019 for a pair of lawsuits.
The engagement agreement had an arbitration clause, Sanchez Fischer Levine says.
“Although SFL sent monthly invoices to BDT listing the legal services rendered and costs incurred, BDT failed to submit payment… within the prescribed time,” the petition says. “BDT’s non-payment of the legal fees ultimately resulted in the termination of the attorney-client relationship between the parties.”
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.
As members of our arbitration team wrote recently, the global pandemic has led
parties to consider arbitration as the optimal process to resolve
disputes given its key advantages as an effective, customizable and
efficient mechanism. The international arbitration community has
shown its ability to pivot quickly and adapt relatively seamlessly
in changing global circumstances. In a testament to the flexibility
of arbitration, arbitral institutions globally have responded with
updates and practice guides to clarify and streamline their rules
and procedures in order to better suit the reality of disputes in
In summary
Rights holders have traditionally turned to court litigation to protect IP rights such as patents, copyrights, trademarks and trade secrets – or to enforce IP licensing agreements. This brings certain challenges, such as a public forum, unfamiliar laws and procedures, judges with varying IP law expertise, concern for national interests, and the risk that a judgment cannot be enforced in other jurisdictions. Arbitration offers an alternative mechanism and has a number of advantages, including confidentiality, a neutral forum or a single forum, the ability to select arbitrators with technical expertise, symmetrical risk for licensors, and cross-border enforceability of arbitral awards. This chapter considers the viability and desirability of arbitration as a means of resolving cross-border IP and IP-related disputes with a focus on Asia.
PRIVACY SHIELD POLICY
Prior: 9-03-2019
Advertising Specialty Institute, Inc. (“ASI,” “our,” “we” or “us”) complies with the EU-US Privacy Shield Framework administered by the US Department of Commerce (together “Privacy Shield”) regarding the collection, use and retention of EU Personal Data (as defined below) This means that ASI certified that it adheres to the principles of Notice, Choice, Accountability for Onward Transfer, Security, Data Integrity and Purpose Limitation, Access and Recourse, Enforcement and Liability as defined in the Privacy Shield (“Privacy Shield Principles”). If there is any conflict between the terms in the ASI Privacy Shield Policy and the Privacy Shield Principles, the Privacy Shield Principles shall govern.