第19回模擬仲裁日本大会 (19th Vis Japan Moot)

International commercial arbitration emerged in the twentieth century as the default mechanism for resolving cross-border business disputes, offering parties a neutral forum, procedural flexibility, and globally enforceable awards. The 1958 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, now ratified by over 170 states, established the foundational regime under which awards rendered in one contracting state are enforceable in all others, subject to narrow grounds for refusal. The UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration (1985, amended 2006) further harmonised national arbitration statutes, and institutions such as the ICC, LCIA, SIAC, HKIAC, and JCAA administer thousands of cases annually under their respective rules. Core procedural questions recurrently tested in the Vis Moot include the scope and validity of the arbitration agreement, the tribunal's competence-competence to rule on its own jurisdiction, the law applicable to the arbitration agreement (as distinct from the lex contractus and the lex arbitri), the conduct of evidentiary proceedings (often referencing the IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence), and challenges to arbitrators on grounds of independence or impartiality (informed by the IBA Guidelines on Conflicts of Interest). Issues of joinder, consolidation, and the extension of arbitration agreements to non-signatories — through doctrines such as group of companies, agency, or estoppel — continue to generate divergent national jurisprudence. Contemporary debates focus on transparency, third-party funding disclosure, the use of emergency arbitrators, the interaction between arbitration and state court anti-suit injunctions, and the grounds on which awards may be set aside at the seat or refused enforcement under Article V of the New York Convention, particularly the public policy exception. The 2024 Vis problem, like its predecessors, situates these doctrinal questions within a realistic commercial dispute, requiring delegates to argue both procedural and substantive issues before a tribunal seated under a Model Law jurisdiction.

The United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG), adopted in Vienna in 1980 and in force since 1988, is the principal uniform substantive law governing cross-border sales contracts. Drafted under UNCITRAL auspices to bridge civil law and common law traditions, it now binds over 95 contracting states accounting for the bulk of world trade. The CISG applies automatically to contracts for the sale of goods between parties whose places of business are in different contracting states, unless the parties opt out under Article 6, and it governs contract formation (Part II) and the rights and obligations of buyers and sellers (Part III). The Vis Moot's substantive issues typically engage the CISG's core doctrines: offer and acceptance under Articles 14–24, including the battle of the forms; conformity of the goods and the buyer's duty to examine and give notice under Articles 38–39; fundamental breach under Article 25 and the consequent right to avoid the contract under Articles 49 and 64; the measure of damages under Articles 74–77, including foreseeability and the duty to mitigate; and exemption from liability for impediments beyond a party's control under Article 79, which has gained renewed prominence in the wake of pandemic-era supply disruptions and sanctions regimes. The Convention is supplemented by general principles such as good faith in Article 7(1) and, in matters not expressly settled, by the law applicable under conflict-of-laws rules — often informed by the UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts. Ongoing doctrinal questions include the interaction between the CISG and domestic mandatory rules, the treatment of digital and hybrid goods, the standards for incorporating standard terms across legal traditions, hardship and renegotiation duties, and the role of soft-law instruments in interpreting the Convention. Divergences in national case law, partially addressed through the UNCITRAL CLOUT database and the CISG Advisory Council's opinions, remain a central concern for practitioners and a recurring battleground for Vis advocates.