 |
 |
|
|
Now in his 20th year as a neutral focused on complex business disputes, international and domestic, Mr. Goldstein has served in more than 120 cases as an arbitrator and more than 100 cases as a mediator. Major business and industry sectors in Mr. Goldstein’s work as a neutral include aviation, banking and finance, construction-engineering, life sciences and information technology.
Mr. Goldstein had a 35-year career as an advocate in U.S. litigation and international arbitration, practicing and ultimately leading the international arbitration practices at Proskauer Rose (1980-2003) in New York and Paris and Hodgson Russ in New York and Toronto (2004-2007).
Mr. Goldstein is perennially peer-review ranked in Chambers Global and Chambers USA as one of America’s leading international arbitrators, and is also peer recognized in 2025 (as in all prior years since 2010) in the rankings of Who’s Who Legal (now Lexology), this year with Lexology’s coveted Thought Leader designation.
Chambers USA 2025 captured in its research peer assessments of Mr. Goldstein such as the following :
“Marc is one of the top international arbitrators in New York. He is someone that you would consider for the most challenging and sophisticated cases.”
“Marc has a super sharp mind, he is really analytical and able to dissect where the real issues are. In many respects, Marc thinks miles ahead of the parties.”
“Marc has such deep knowledge of arbitration law and practice. [He] is quick, writes and responds quickly. He is a very proactive arbitrator.”
Mr. Goldstein’s Arbitration Commentaries “blog” established in 2009 reaches a broad global audience with essays on developments in arbitration law and practice.
In March 2022 an obscure website allegedly devoted to “whistleblowing” concerning Wall Street misconduct published an article aligned with the interests of the Respondents in an international arbitration in which I serve as the Tribunal Chair. The article falsely reported that, according to whistleblower-provided information, I had apparently accepted a $250,000 bribe from one of the Claimants at the time of my appointment. Please read here (https://wallstreetwhistleblower.org/2022/03/15/exclusive-whistleblower-exposes-alleged-goldman-sachs-bribery-scheme/). At intervals from that time up to February 2025, another website evidently aligned with the interests of the same Respondents published additional false reports and repeated the false allegation of corruption. Please read here ( https://arbitrationmonitor.com/is-the-aaa-icdr-failing-to-address-corruption-of-arbitration-tribunals/; https://arbitrationmonitor.com/marc-goldstein-and-the-problem-of-the-sua-sponte-arbitrator/). Observing the arbitrator’s ethical duty of confidentiality, rather than testing the limits of that duty, I have until now avoided speaking publicly about these matters while the case proceeded.
In March 2025, after issuance of our Tribunal’s Fifth Partial Final Award, the Claimants elected to make public disclosure of each of our Tribunal’s five Partial Final Awards and three of our Procedural Orders. All of these were in turn republished as links in a Global Arbitration Review article. The GAR article is linked HERE, the Fifth Partial Final Award HERE, and that Award’s appendices (our prior Awards and three Procedural Orders.) HERE. Respondents have not only been unanimously on the losing side in five Partial Final Awards, but the first four of those five awards have been confirmed by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York in Judgments affirmed by the US Second Circuit Court of Appeals, and Respondents attempts to have those awards vacated on grounds of Tribunal bias and misconduct failed. (The Fifth Partial Award – which finds the Respondents to have been responsible for the false Internet publications, and awards punitive damages -- is before the US District Court for confirmation. Respondents seek vacatur of the Award). In addition, the District Court has dismissed a separate lawsuit by Respondents to disqualify the Tribunal.
Despite these outcomes, and even though, as reported in the Fifth Partial Final Award, each of the five attempts by the Respondents to challenge my continued service as an arbitrator before the administering institution was rejected, these false allegations made on the Internet have remained on the Internet, and predictably have found their way into AI summaries concerning my reputation such as ChatGPT. Those who published these falsehoods on the Internet evidently intended to cause reputational harm in service of the Respondents’ objectives.
The allegations made against me are false. If it is meaningful to your evaluation of my candidacy for appointment, I encourage you to read our Tribunal’s Awards, the Judgments of the Southern District of New York and the Second Circuit mentioned above, and the District Court’s Judgment dated April 22, 2025 finding the Respondents in contempt of court. Proceedings that are in progress seeking further contempt sanctions against those Respondents are also reflected on the Southern District Court’s public docket.
