Do you want to improve your writing? Try our new evaluation service and get detailed feedback.
Check Your Text it's free

perspective in providing parties, counsel, arbitrators and institutions in international arbitration with a new set of rules that grant broader and more proactive powers to arbitral tribunals,

perspective in providing parties, counsel, arbitrators and institutions in international arbitration with a new set of rules that grant broader and more proactive powers to arbitral tribunals, yXLYD
It is evident that, the Prague Rules bring a new perspective in providing parties, counsel, arbitrators and institutions in international arbitration with a new set of rules that grant broader and more proactive powers to arbitral tribunals, making them more comfortable in the “driving seat”. However, specifically regarding the Article 9 of the Prague Rules, the comments are likely to be vice versa. In my opinion, assistance of Arbitral Tribunal in amicable settlement under the Prague Rules could be regulated in more accurate and detailed manner in order to eliminate “toxic ambiguities” by having benefited from alternative instruments, such as IBA and CEDR Rules regulating the same issues. In consequence, despite the fact that incorporating “assistance of Arbitral Tribunal in amicable settlement” in the content of the Rules may have some procedural profits, such as avoiding from the involvement of a separate neutral person for the purpose of conducting a mediation or conciliation before, during or in parallel with the arbitration which means duplicating the work, incurring additional costs and also possibly losing time, in my view, the above-discussed potential problems arising out of the ambiguity and insufficiency of that article outweigh its advantages.
It is evident that, the Prague
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
Rules
bring a new perspective in providing parties, counsel, arbitrators and institutions in international arbitration with a new set of
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
rules
that grant broader and more proactive powers to
Possible spelling mistake found.
arbitral
tribunals, making them more comfortable in the “driving seat”.
However
,
specifically
regarding the Article 9 of the Prague
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
Rules
, the comments are likely to be vice versa. In my opinion, assistance of
Possible spelling mistake found.
Arbitral
Tribunal in amicable settlement under the Prague
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
Rules
could
be regulated
in more accurate and detailed manner in order to eliminate “toxic ambiguities” by having benefited from alternative instruments, such as IBA and
Possible spelling mistake found.
CEDR
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
Rules
regulating the same issues. In consequence, despite the fact that incorporating “assistance of
Possible spelling mistake found.
Arbitral
Tribunal in amicable settlement” in the content of the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
Rules
may have
This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:
some
procedural profits, such as avoiding from the involvement of a separate neutral person for the purpose of conducting a mediation or conciliation
This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:
before
, during or in parallel with the arbitration which means duplicating the work, incurring additional costs and
also
possibly
losing time, in my view, the above-discussed potential problems arising out of the ambiguity and insufficiency of that article outweigh its advantages.
What do you think?
  • This is funny writingFunny
  • I love this writingLove
  • This writing has blown my mindWow
  • It made me angryAngry
  • It made me sadSad

IELTS essay perspective in providing parties, counsel, arbitrators and institutions in international arbitration with a new set of rules that grant broader and more proactive powers to arbitral tribunals,

Essay
  American English
1 paragraphs
194 words
This writing has been penalized,
text can't be
less than 250 words in Task 2
and less than 150 words in Task 1
5.0
Overall Band Score
Coherence and Cohesion: 5.5
  • Structure your answers in logical paragraphs
  • ?
    One main idea per paragraph
  • Include an introduction and conclusion
  • Support main points with an explanation and then an example
  • Use cohesive linking words accurately and appropriately
  • Vary your linking phrases using synonyms
Lexical Resource: 5.5
  • Try to vary your vocabulary using accurate synonyms
  • Use less common question specific words that accurately convey meaning
  • Check your work for spelling and word formation mistakes
Grammatical Range: 6.5
  • Use a variety of complex and simple sentences
  • Check your writing for errors
Task Achievement: 5.0
  • Answer all parts of the question
  • ?
    Present relevant ideas
  • Fully explain these ideas
  • Support ideas with relevant, specific examples
Labels Descriptions
  • ?
    Currently is not available
  • Meet the criteria
  • Doesn't meet the criteria
Recent posts





Get more results for topic:
  • perspective in providing parties, counsel, arbitrators and institutions in international arbitration with a new set of rules that grant broader and more proactive powers to arbitral tribunals,