Discussing content and language integrated learning in domain name dispute resolution

Contemporary legal institutions like the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) rely on standardized discursive resources to create homogeneous templates for their discourse. Standardization remains useful since it minimizes risks and optimizes time costs and administrative efficiency. Yet, it succinctly pales the presence of existing power asymmetries. The study addresses this phenomenon to discuss the crucial role of teaching CLIL to young lawyers, hence preventing discourse-based inequalities. The analysis argues that the absence of CLIL training in WIPO Domain Name Dispute Resolution favours the emergence of challenging discourse-based asymmetries. The research discusses WIPO standardization as a double-edged sword. On the one hand, standardization is viewed as an institutional strategy to prevent procedural risks. On the other, it reaffirms the status quo and may hide power inequalities. In this spirit, this paper discusses some of the interdisciplinary benefits that come out of bringing into conjunction legal disciplinary knowledge and linguistic knowledge in future law curricula. Disciplinary knowledge is to be planned and assessed by law professionals, but, as far as linguistic knowledge is concerned, Content and Language Integrated Learning is primarily intended to serve a dual learning goal, that is, first, to teach a language which is not the learner's mother tongue in non-linguistic subjects and, second, to do so with a view on competence in the target language and domain-specific content.