Carlos F. Concepción, FCIArb
Board Certified International Litigation & Arbitration
About Carlos
Partner
Phone: +1.305.444.6669 | Email: cfconcepcion@concepcionlaw.com
Locations: Miami, FL and Madrid, Spain
Carlos is a Partner in Concepcion Global PLLC, a law firm with offices in Miami and Madrid. He serves as an independent arbitrator, and an advocate and counselor for select clients. As an arbitrator, he focuses on institutional proceedings involving international and complex domestic commercial disputes, and investment-treaty matters administered by ICSID. As an advocate, he represents select clients on complex international and domestic business disputes, and parties in investor-state international treaty cases.
He has more than 35 years of experience in international disputes, especially in the intersection between common and civil law jurisdictions. Part of this experience includes serving leadership roles in some of the largest firms in the world and establishing and managing a boutique international disputes law firm in Miami, Florida.
-
Counsel for a U.S. Construction company in a ICSID dispute involving the violation of various investment treaties between Panama and the United States
Counsel for a US Construction Company in an ICC matter seated in Panama regarding Respondent’s failure to pay the Petitioner for services and expenses incurred in the development of various infra structure projects.
Counsel for Petitioner in the Confirmation and Enforcement of an International Arbitration Award for US$135MM under the New York and Panama Conventions.
Co-Arbitrator in an ICC matter regarding a Distribution Supply Agreement between parties from the US and Guatemala.
Arbitrator in a ICSID matter between an investor from Venezuela and Respondent Costa Rica.
Sole Arbitrator in a ICDR dispute among investors in a Hotel and Casino in the Dominican Republic.
Sole arbitrator in a ICDR case involving a software licensing dispute between a distributor in Costa Rica and U.S. company.
Arbitrator in a CPR case involving allegations of financial statement fraud in a dispute between a major accounting firm and bankruptcy trustee.
Sole Arbitrator in a CPR dispute between an international law firm and its former European client.
Sole Arbitrator in an ICDR dispute between Puerto Rico companies regarding media and publishing services.
Arbitrator in an ICC dispute between telecommunication companies in Spain and El Salvador.
Counsel for a German manufacturing company in an ICC arbitration relating to a claim filed by a distributor in Massachusetts alleging various breaches of a distribution agreement.
Counsel in a UNCITRAL multi-treaty multi-party matter (administered by ICSID) for six Claimants from Portugal, Argentina, and Canada who were investors in several Hotels seized by local authorities in Mexico.
Counsel for Amici in a US Supreme Court case in which SCOTUS considered whether the common law doctrine of Equitable Estoppel is available to “non-signatories” of an international arbitration agreement who seek to compel arbitration under the New York Convention and Chapter 2 of the Federal Arbitration Act.
Counsel for Claimant in an ICC shareholder dispute in Bogota regarding a pharmaceutical company and related Award confirmation proceedings in the Southern District of Florida.
Counsel for petitioner in an ICC dispute between the two controlling shareholders of a multilevel vitamin and herbal supplement company doing business in Mexico and the United States.
Counsel for Petitioner in a Discovery dispute under 28 USC 1782 relating to the investment in a joint stock company registered under the laws of Russia.
Counsel for Amici in a Florida Supreme Court case in which the Court considered whether an arbitration clause must expressly say that the arbitrators have the power to determine arbitrability or whether it is enough to incorporate the AAA rules into the clause.
Counsel for Respondent in an ICC dispute between a UK company and a Florida company related to media and entertainment services.
Counsel for Respondent in an ICC case regarding a dispute between a Florida distributor and a Beijing manufacturer of die-cast products.
Counsel for Petitioner in an ICDR dispute involving the financing of durable medical equipment products in Latin America.
Counsel for a group of Canadian developers and investors in timeshare resorts in the Dominican Republic.
Counsel for a Special Litigation Committee of the Board of Directors of a Puerto Rico Bank in a derivative action in the District Court for Puerto Rico with related proceedings in the Southern District of Florida.
Counsel for a Central American government agency in the investigation of claims arising from the sale and settlement of various viatical insurance policies.
Counsel, in many cases, for the Professional Liability Unit of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) in the investigation and subsequent litigation against various officers, directors and outside accounting firms in connection with the failure of many savings and loans and national banks. All proceedings were in various U.S. District Courts pursuant to the FDIC’s receivership powers under the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA).
-
J.D., with High Honors, University of Florida
Order of the Coif
B.A., Magna Cum Laude, Florida State University
Phi Beta Kappa
-
Florida
Texas
Colorado
U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Florida
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida
U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit
U.S. Supreme Court
-
Florida Bar Board Certified in International Litigation & Arbitration.
Chambers, Nationwide- International Arbitration: Counsel.
Chambers USA- America’s Leading Lawyers for Business.
Legal 500 Miami Elite International Arbitration.
The Best Lawyers in America, International Commercial Arbitration
WWL/Lexology Arbitration 2024
Fellow, College of Commercial Arbitrators
Fellow, Chartered Institute of Arbitrators.
AV Rated by Martindale Hubbell
-
Board Certified in International Litigation and Arbitration—The Florida Bar
-
Board of Trustees; University of Florida Law School Alumni Association
Federalist Society; Federalism & Separation of Powers Practice Group
Cato Institute; The Volunteer Society
-
Law 360; International Arbitration Editorial Advisory Board, 2019-2022
Miami International Arbitration Society, Chair 2019, Current Board Member
Fellow, Chartered Institute of Arbitrators
International Chamber of Commerce; USCIB Arbitrator
International Institute for Conflict Prevention & Resolution
CPR); Panel of Distinguished Neutrals
International Center for Dispute Resolution ( ICDR); Panel Member
American Bar Association; Commercial Arbitration Panel Member
Jamaica International Arbitration Center; Panel Member
International Bar Association; Arbitration Committee
Shenzhen Court of International Arbitration; Panel Member
AmCham Peru International Arbitration Center (Member of the Court)
BVI International Arbitration Center; Panel of Arbitrators
FAQs
-
In most cases, a Tribunal Secretary will add value to the Parties and the Arbitrators. Their services usually reduce the overall cost of the proceedings and aids the tribunal in task-management. In determining whether a Tribunal Secretary would be beneficial in a particular case, I will consider a variety of factors including the complexity and nature of the case, the scope of the pleadings, and the extent of the anticipated evidence.
I will never appoint a Tribunal Secretary without the prior consent and approval of the Parties. Finally, I would insist that the Tribunal Secretary observe the same level of impartiality and independence as the Arbitrators.
-
Although I approach cases from the perspective that the proceedings “belong to the Parties”, I am well aware of the case management differences between the civil law and common law traditions. In my experience, an Arbitrator must be flexible and select the procedures and techniques from these different legal traditions in a manner that is best suited to the circumstances of each case.
-
The primary reason Parties select arbitration is to resolve their disputes efficiently and cost-effectively. Mediation can be an integral part of the arbitration process. If the Parties desire, I will facilitate their interest in reaching an early resolution of the dispute. However, I will always avoid any conduct that may question my independence and impartiality, or which may be contrary to the Parties' agreement.
-
I favor addressing dispositive issues early in a case and, as may be appropriate, throughout the proceedings. Parties should not have to engage in extensive and costly proceedings on issues that are narrow and readily resolvable. If the Parties wish to present dispositive motions, I will schedule a briefing period on dispositive motions that provides the Parties with ample opportunity to submit their respective arguments.
-
I will typically apply the IBA rules. If appropriate, I may also apply these rules against the wishes of a particular party.
-
Yes, I encourage the submission of skeleton arguments to assist the tribunal in focusing on the main facts and issues. In a complex case, skeleton arguments may benefit the tribunal by outlining the arguments and relevant evidence.
-
I prefer limited and focused discovery that follows a Redfern Schedule. Unless the controlling Arbitration agreement compels me to do so, I will rarely-if ever, allow the Parties to pursue “American Style” discovery.
-
With full disclosure, I prefer to consult with the party that appointed me regarding the selection of the Chair and may suggest potential chairs if requested by the party.
-
Yes, I encourage the Parties to interview the potential Chairs that I may have identified. This is consistent with the Parties' obligation to maintain an active role in all stages of the proceeding, especially in the appointment process.
-
I prefer to address and resolve this sensitive issue immediately when it allegedly occurs.
-
I will consider the allocation of costs in any final award based on the merits of the claims and defenses presented. This assumes the Parties' agreement or applicable rules do not provide for an alternative measure or standard for the allocation of costs.
-
Although I am trained in the common law tradition, many of my international commercial arbitration matters have either been “seated” in a non-US city or have involved the laws of a country other than the USA. As a result of my experience in these matters, and especially in Investor-State disputes, my “procedural style” is a mix between the common law Socratic approach and the civil law “inquisitorial” approach to case management. I do clearly prefer, however, to “front load’ the evidence in the civil tradition and minimize the use of “rebuttal” pleadings and evidence. In the end, my “style” is case dependent and will always be driven by the overarching need for efficiency and due process.
-
Construction, financial services, technology, and international supply chain disputes.