Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Introduction
Background
Conclusion
References
All Topics
Law
Dispute Resolution and Arbitration

IS INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION UNIVERSAL?

Profile image of Halil Rahman BasaranHalil Rahman Basaran

2015, ILSA Journal of International & Comparative Law

Abstract

International arbitration is a universal concept and a flexible institution transcending the public law/private law divide. The purpose, the place and the secrecy of international arbitration, the function of arbitrators, institutional commonality, the enforcement of arbitral decisions, the law to be applied in arbitration and the lack of binding precedent all point to the idea that international arbitration is a method of dispute settlement based upon common sense. Whomever the parties to and whatever the subjects of international arbitration may be, one cannot posit a definite or absolute differentiation between public and private international law arbitration. Indeed, arbitration's universality and flexibility are most visible in mixed arbitrations - such as the Iran-USA Arbitral Tribunal - where a high number of diverse disputes following a crisis push the limits of creativity in the founding and the functioning of international arbitration.

Related papers

International Arbitration
Sling Cinco
View PDFchevron_right
International Arbitration as a Spontaneous Legal Order
Fabio Núñez del Prado

Revista Procesos de Mercado Nº 27 (Madrid, Spain), 2020

Methodological Individualism (or better, praxeology) is essential to understand social phenomena. Praxeology should be applied not only to the study of the social process but also to the study of the different aspects of this process, such as Economics, Law, and Institutions. Hence, social sciences, including the Law (and International Arbitration within it) should therefore be studied from Methodological Individualism. There have been very few attempts to draw up a legal theory of arbitration. The lack of a comprehensive theory capable of explaining Arbitration’s foundation may have undesired results, both with regard to its (mal-) functioning and its future survival. We argue in this paper that praxeology, as the science that studies the logic of human action, and the theory of the spontaneous evolution of institutions, is the only methodology that can explain International Arbitration integrally. International arbitration is a means by which international disputes can be definitely resolved, pursuant to the parties’ agreement, by impartial, non-public decision-makers, appointed by or for the parties, applying neutral judicial procedures that provide the parties an opportunity to be heard. Today it is the main mechanism for solving international disputes involving States, individuals, and/or corporations. International arbitration is also a social-juridical institution of spontaneous evolution.

View PDFchevron_right
An Analysis of National Courts Involvement in International Commercial Arbitration; Can International Commercial Arbitration Be Effective without National Courts
Dr. Chinwe A Umadia

Globalisation has prompted the countries of the world to seek effective and efficient methods of dispute resolution which has led to the importance and widespread acceptance of arbitration as a preferred means of dispute resolution without the involvement of the National courts, however, this paper will show that the national courts are involved in the process of arbitration from commencement to recognition and enforcement of the arbitral awards. The purpose of this paper is to propose an appellate arbitral tribunal which will guarantee the independence of the arbitral process from the supervision and strict control of the national courts which is traditionally mandated to administer justice. This research paper aims to examine how national courts have interfered with the process of arbitration and whether arbitration can be effective on its own through an appellate arbitral tribunal. The effect of this study which proposes an appellate arbitral tribunal will, if implemented, will reinforce the confidence of states in the fast effective and final process of dispute resolution through arbitration.

View PDFchevron_right
International Arbitration: Law and Practice. By J. L. Simpson and Hazel Fox. New York: Frederick A. Praeger, 1959. pp. xx, 330. Index. $8.00
Munir Maniruzzaman

American Journal of International Law, 1960

View PDFchevron_right
Early and recent efforts to support International Arbitration
Dr. Ibrahim H. Hussney

In view of the growing assured sense of the international traders and investors, toward the speedy and adequate practice of the mechanisms of the alternative dispute resolution to resolve the disputes. While the arbitration comes on the top of these means, the international community has established many rules and adopted many measures that have contributed and still continue to contribute a significant support for both, the international commercial arbitration system and international investment arbitration system, not only to encourage trade and investment between countries and each other, but also to support the features and mechanisms of the modern economies. In the next few lines, we will explore together some of the efforts made previously and recently by the organizations and bodies of the international community to support this trend. • The United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCETRAL) The United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCETRAL) Adopted special rules, which approved on 1974 by the General Assembly of the United Nations, in order to facilitate Ad-Hoc arbitration procedures, instead such procedures to be prepared by litigants or arbitral tribunal; which may not agree later.

View PDFchevron_right
Impacts of cultural differences on international arbitration based on the example of Iran
Mary Howard

2018

This research aims to ascertain whether and to what extent cultural issues impact the accessibility and effectiveness of international arbitration, and to provide recommendations which will contribute to the improvement of international arbitration. It examines the origin of arbitration as a means of resolving disputes, the development of current international arbitration law and the UNCITRAL Model Arbitration Law. It compares the arbitration law and procedures of the US, England and Wales (E&W), and Iran. It then focuses on the effect of social and legal culture on international arbitration. The aim of this research is achieved through a multi-methods study. An extensive review of the relevant literature in both Farsi and English was conducted. A case study from the Iran and the US international arbitration tribunal of the 1980s. A comparative study of the law and procedures was carried out to ascertain the similarities and differences of each jurisdiction. Finally, a series of sem...

View PDFchevron_right
The legal foundations of International Commercial Arbitration.
Valentina Stampouli
View PDFchevron_right
Approaching the Global Arbitration Table: Comparing the Advantages of Arbitration as Seen by Practitioners in East Asia and the West
Shahla Ali

Review of Litigation, 2009

How diverse cultures approach conflict in the context of the integration of global markets is a new arena for research and practice. To date, most research on international arbitration has focused exclusively on Western models of arbitration as practiced in Europe and North America. While such studies accurately reflected the geographic foci of international arbitration practice in the mid-twentieth century, the number of international arbitrations conducted in East Asia has recently been growing steadily and on par with growth in Western regions. This Article presents a cross-cultural examination of how international arbitrators in East Asian and Western countries view the relative advantages of international arbitration. The results of a 115 person survey and 64 follow up interviews shed light on the underlying cultural attitudes and approaches to international arbitration as practiced in diverse regions. The findings indicate that arbitration practitioners’ perceptions of the benefits of treaty-based features of international arbitration - such as enforceability, neutrality, limited discovery, and predictability - demonstrate a high degree of convergence across regions. At the same time, cultural and socioeconomic distinctions are reflected in varying arbitrator perceptions regarding the importance of amicability, confidentiality, voluntary compliance, and efficiency of international arbitration proceedings. In particular, amicability and confidentiality are regarded as having greater importance among East Asian arbitrators, while the limited scope of discovery is regarded with greater importance in the West.

View PDFchevron_right
Review of The Principles and Practice of International Commercial Arbitration by Margaret L. Moses
Adrian Aleman

Berkeley Journal of International Law, 2013

In recent decades, globalization has expanded and strengthened states’ economic relations around the world. In this context, the effects of globalization have benefited private commercial entities by providing them broader and more attractive means of concluding transactions. As a consequence, international transactions have experienced increasing degrees of complexity regarding legal matters. The old paradigm that applied local laws in every dispute is no longer the answer for new international transactions. The latest element of internationalization involves application of other countries’ laws and, consequently, involvement of their judicial systems. This latter effect represents a disadvantage for private entities unfamiliar with the legal system of a particular country. International litigation can also be very expensive, and it may take several years before the parties reach a final resolution. Therefore, parties are usually resistant to subjecting themselves to the jurisdicti...

View PDFchevron_right
A Critical Evaluation of International Commercial Arbitration within the National Legal System
Adaku R . Ohagwu LL.M

SSRN Electronic Journal, 2015

Over the years, there has been an increase in trade across borders between countries. With advancement in technology resulting in a new global business paradigm, various trade and governmental bodies such as the World Trade Organisation (WTO), the Economic Community of West Africa (ECOWAS) have intensified efforts to end protectionism, establish liberalized cross borders and put an end to the prevalence of beggar-thy-neighbour economic policies. While these efforts have been hugely successful, trade barriers are being erected in an unlikely place-international commercial arbitration. These trade barriers have been erected because of conflicting national arbitral rules, applicability of substantive and procedural law, forum shopping, unenforceability of arbitration agreements and resulting arbitral awards especially against state parties. The outcome of the legal straits experienced by foreign investors in settling arbitration issues with their local partners led to a series of international interventions aimed at rectifying the problem. Prominent among these are the internalization of the arbitration rules in the arbitration law of all signatory states under the auspices of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) and the establishment of the International Chambers of Commerce (ICC) Rules of Arbitration. This paper seeks to conduct a critical evaluation of international commercial arbitration within the national legal systems of the United Kingdom and Nigeria with the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration (Model Law) as the legal framework. Keywords: UNCITRAL, Nigeria, United Kingdom, Arbitration

View PDFchevron_right

References (82)

  1. Saul Perloff, The Ties That Bind: The Limits ofAutonomy and Uniformity in International Commercial Arbitration, 13 U. PA. J. INT'L BUS. L. 323, 328 (1992).
  2. See generally U.N. Conference on International Commercial Arbitration (1958), http://www.uncitral.org/pdf/english/texts/arbitration/NY-conv/XXIIl _e.pdf (last visited Mar. 30, 2015).
  3. Id.
  4. See generally Ashley M. Weelock, An Issue of Enforcement: Foreign Arbitration And Choice-Of-Law Clauses Within A Jones Act Seaman's Employment Contract, 7 TUL. MAR. L.J. 285 (2012).
  5. Andrew Barraclough & Jeff Waincymer, Mandatory Rules of Law in International CommercialArbitration, 6 MELB. J. INT'L L. 1, 3 (2005).
  6. Id. at6.
  7. Id. at 2.
  8. Christopher S. Gibson, Arbitration, Civilization and Public Policy: Seeking Counterpoise Between Arbitral Autonomy and the Public Policy Defense in View of Foreign Mandatory Public Law, 113 PENN ST. L. REv. 1227, 1234 (2009).
  9. Id. at 1265.
  10. See generally Wolfgang Friedman, The Uses of General Principles in the Development of International Law, 57 AM. J. INT'L L. 279 (1963).
  11. Id. at 282. 2015] 34. Introduction to ICC Arbitration, INT'L. CoMM. ARB. WORLD Bus. ORG., http://www.iccwbo.org/Products-and-Services/Arbitration-and-ADR/Arbitration/Introduction-to-ICC- Arbitration/Statistics/ (last visited Mar. 30 2015).
  12. Ruth Teitelbaum, A Look At The Public Interest In Investment Arbitration: Is It Unique? What Should We Do About It? 5 BERKELEY J. INT'L L. 54, 56 (2010).
  13. Id.
  14. Id. at 60.
  15. Weelock, supra note 19, at 292.
  16. See generally Mohammad Reza Baniassadi, Do Mandatory Rules of Public Law Limit Choice of Law in International CommercialArbitration?, 10 INT'L TAX AND BUS. L. 59 (1992).
  17. See generally Teitelbaum, supra note 35. 2015] 79. Id.
  18. Kreindler & Kopp, supra note 51, at § 13.
  19. Gibson, supra note 23, at 1244.
  20. Fry, supra note 78, at 134.
  21. Reza Baniassadi, supra note 40, at 69-70.
  22. Catherine Rogers, The Vocation of the International Arbitrator, 20 AM. U. INT'L L. REV. 957, 996 (2004). 2015] 101. Bergsten, supra note 96, at 297.
  23. Id. 103. International Centre for Settlement of Investment Dispute, ICSID.ORG, https://icsid.worldbank.org/apps/ICSIDWEB/about/Pages/default.aspx (last visited Mar. 16, 2015) [hereinafter ICSID].
  24. Id.
  25. Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, art. 27, May 23, 1969, 1155 U.N.T.S. 332, available at https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%201155/volume-1155-1-18232- English.pdf (last visited Feb. 7, 2015) [hereinafter Vienna Convention].
  26. Swisslion Doo Skopje v. Former Yugoslav Rep. of Maced., ICSID Case no. ARB/09/16, 345 (July 26, 2012) ("It is not possible to quantify the damages with certainty, but it is well established in international law that difficulty in ascertaining damages does not preclude being awarded [damages] in the event of a breach..."). Indeed, ICSID arbitral tribunals act like classical international courts. 107. See generally inci Ataman-Figanmese, Differences Between International Commercial Arbitration and International Investment Arbitration (Turk.), n. 14 (2011).
  27. Mavrommatis Palestine Concessions (Greece v. Brit.), 1924 P.C.I.J. (ser. B) No. 3, at 12 (Aug. 30).
  28. See generally ANTONIO CASSESSE, INTERNATIONAL LAW (Oxford University Press, 2d ed. 2005). 110. Conflict of Law, ENCYCLOPEDIA.COM, http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/Conflict of Laws.aspx (last visited Mar. 16, 2015).
  29. See Texaco Overseas Petroleum Co. v. Gov't Libyan Arab Rep., Award of Arb., R.J. Dupuy, 17 I.L.M., 1, 7 (Jan. 18, 1977).
  30. G.W. Haight InternationalArbitration, 14 CASE W. RES. J. INT'L L. 253, 256 (1982).
  31. See generally Christopher Pinto & Bridie McAsey, Iran-United States Claims Tribunal, OXFORDPUBLICINTERNATIONALLAW.COM (Mar. 2013), http://opil.ouplaw.com/view/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690- e49?rskey-9v9OqK&result=2&prd=EPIL (last visited Mar. 17, 2015).
  32. United Nations Commission on International Trade Law Arbitration Rules, G.A. Res. 31/98, 1, U.N. Doc. A/RES/31/98 (Dec. 15, 1976), available at http://www.uncitral.org/pdf/english/texts/arbitration/arb-rules/arb-rules.pdf (last visited Mar. 16, 2015) [hereinafter UNCITRAL].
  33. See generally Brower, supra note 9. 125. ICSID, supra note 103.
  34. Id.
  35. Id. 2015] https://icsid.worldbank.org/apps/ICSIDWEB/icsiddocs/Documents/ICSfD%2Convention%2English.p df (last visited Mar. 16, 2015) [hereinafter ICSID Convention].
  36. See generally inci Ataman-Figanmese, supra note 107.
  37. See generally ICSID Convention, supra note 128. 131. Id. at art. 42(l).
  38. Id. at arts. 53, 54(1).
  39. Statute of the International Court of Justice, 1945 I.C.J. art. 38, 59 Stat. 1031 available at http://legal.un.org/avl/pdf/ha/sicj/icj statute-e.pdf (last visited Mar. 16, 2015) [hereinafter ICJ Statute]. 134. Id.
  40. Statistics-ICC Arbitration in 2013, INTERNATIONALCHAMBEROFCOMMERCE.COM, HTTP://www.iccwbo.org/Products-and-Services/Arbitratin-and-ADR/Arbitratin/Intrduction-to-ICC- Arbitration/Statistics/ (last visited Mar. 03, 2015).
  41. Id.
  42. See Generally ICSID Convention, supra note 128.
  43. Arif v. Republic of Mold., ICSID Case No. ARB/l 1/23, Award, 134 (Apr. 8, 2013), http://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/italawl370.pdf. 145. Alec Stone Sweet, Proportionality, General Principles of Law, and Investor-State Arbitration: A Response to Jose Alvarez, 46 N.Y.U. J. INT'L L. & POL. 911,912 (2014).
  44. ICSID Convention, supra note 128, at art. 42(1).
  45. Asian Agric. Prod. Ltd v. Republic of Sri Lanka, ICSID Case no. ARB/87/3, 21 (June 27, 1990), 4 ICSID Rep. 246 (1990).
  46. Vienna Convention, supra note 105, at art. 31(3)(c).
  47. See Elihu Lauterpacht, International Law and Private Foreign Investment, 4 IND. J. OF GLOBAL LEGAL STUD. 259, 272 (1997);
  48. Fr. v. Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, 1929 P.C.I.J. (ser. A) No. 20, 43 (July 20).
  49. Campbell McLachlan, Investment Treaties and General International Law, 57 INT'L & CoMP. L.Q. 361,373 (2008).
  50. Elihu Lauterpacht, supra note 149, at 272.
  51. Id.
  52. HERSCH LAUTERPACHT, PRIVATE LAW SOURCES AND ANALOGIES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW 45 (1927).
  53. Campbell McLachlan, supra note 150, at 373.
  54. James Crawford, Professor, U. of Cambridge, The Permanent Court of Arbitration and Mixed Arbitration Address at the Celebration of the Centenary of the Permanent Court of Arbitration, I (Oct. 18,2007), available at http://www.pca-cpa.org/showfile.asp?fil-id=973 (last visited Mar. 18,2015).
  55. See Andrea K. Bjorklund, The Costs of Deference: State Sovereignty and International Denials of Justice 10, 57 (2005) (unpublished work) (on file at UC Berkeley School of Law), available at https://www.law.berkeley.edu/files/bjorklund 05.pdf(last visited Apr. 14, 2015).
  56. See generally United States Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Tehran (U.S. v. Iran), 1980
  57. I.C.J. 106 (May 24).
  58. Katja S. Ziegler, Jay Treaty (1794), OXFORDPUBLICINTERNATIONALLAW.COM 1 (Apr. 2013), http://opil.ouplaw.com/view/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690- e50?rskey-5FHlg4&result-I &prd=EPIL (last visited Mar. 26, 2015). 168. See generally id.
  59. See Warren Christopher & Richard M. Mosk, The Iranian Hostage Crisis and the Iran-U.S. Claims Tribunal: Implications for International Dispute Resolution andDiplomacy, 7 PEPP. DiSP. RESOL. L.J. 165, 171 (2007).
  60. Kate Gillespie, U.S. Corporations andlran at The Hague, 44 MIDDLE EAST J. 18,29(1990).
  61. See generally Distributor (Pol.) and Daughter Company of Distributor (Isle of Man) v. Manufacturer (Japan) and Manufacturer Europe (European Country), Case No. 13730 of 2013, 38 Y.B. Comm. Arb. 79, 39 (ICC Int'l Comm. Arb.).
  62. Frequently Asked Questions, INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE, http://www.icj- cij.org/information/index.php?pI=7&p2=2#2 (last visited Mar. 26, 2015).
  63. Christopher & Mosk, supra note 169, at 169.
  64. Claims Settlement Declaration, supra note 161, at art. II.
  65. Id.
  66. Id.
  67. David D. Caron, The Nature of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal and the Evolving Structure ofInternational Dispute Resolution, 84 AM. J. INT'L L. 104, 137 (1990).
  68. Christopher & Mosk, supra note 169, at 173.
  69. Pinto & McAsey, supra note 122, at 18. 2015] 197. Compare Tribunal Rules of Procedure art. 34, Iran-U.S. Claims Tribunal, http://www.iusct.net/General%2Documents/5-TRIBUNAL%2ORULES%200F%20PROCEDURE.pdf (last visited Jan. 20, 2011) [hereinafter Tribunal Rules of Procedure] with UNCITRAL, supra note 123. 198. Tribunal Rules of Procedure, supra note 197, at art. 34.
  70. Karl-Heinz Bockstiegel, Applying the UNCITRAL Rules: The Experience of the Iran- United States Claims Tribunal, 4 BERKELEY J. INT'L L. 266, 268 (1986). 200. See id.
  71. Caron, supra note 192, at 105.
  72. Grant H. Hanessian, "General Principles of Law" in the Iran-U.S. Claims Tribunal, COLUM. J. TRANSNAT'L L. 309, 311 (1988).
  73. Hanessian, supra note 204, at 311-12, 323, 326. For instance, as regards the nationality of corporations (Hous. & Urban Servs. Int'l Inc. v. Iran, 9 Iran-U.S. Cl. Trib. Rep. 313, 330-33 (1985) and the interest rate to be applied (Sylvania Tech. Sys. Inc. v. Iran, 8
  74. Am. Bell Int'l, Inc. v. Iran, 12 Iran-U.S. Cl. Trib. Rep. 170, 172 (1986).
  75. Id.
  76. See generally Aeronutronic Overseas Servs. Inc. v. Iran, 7 Iran-U.S. Cl. Trib. Rep. 217 (1984). 212. See generally id.
  77. See generally Hanessian, supra note 204. 2015] 214. See generally id. 215. Id. at 311.
  78. Claims Settlement Declaration, supra note 161, at art. IV(3).
  79. UNCITRAL, supra note 123, at art. 1(2). These rules should govern the arbitration except that where any of these rules is in conflict with the provision of the law applicable to the arbitration from which the parties cannot derogate, that provision shall prevail.
  80. Caron, supra note 192, at 146. 220. See id.
  81. See generally UNC1TRAL, supra note 123.
  82. See David Lloyd Jones, The Iran-United States Claims Tribunal: Private Rights and State Responsibility, 24 VA. J. INT'L L. 259, 274 (1984).

Related papers

International Arbitration: Selected Preliminary Topics
Giovanni Distefano

A. International arbitration as opposed to other means of dispute settlement B. The Concept of International Arbitration: definition, composition and international public / private arbitration C. The requirement of consent D. Applicable Law E. The pathology of arbitral awards

View PDFchevron_right
Criticism of International Arbitration
Zeynep A. Yıldız
View PDFchevron_right
International Arbitration and International Law
Halil Rahman Basaran

Marmara University Law Faculty Legal Research Journal, 2014

International arbitration is a concept of international law. It endorses the fragmentary nature of international law and, as a reflection of informal international law-making, represents a challenge in terms of rules of recognition. Yet, none of these characteristics can be invoked to deny the contribution of international arbitration to international law. International arbitration is an institution inherent to international law, and one that both enhances and enriches international law.

View PDFchevron_right
§ 12 International Arbitration as a Project of World Order: Reimagining the Legal Foundations of International Arbitration
Santiago Oñate

The Law between Objectivity and Power

…the complex of social processes and organization that are generally referred to as "the law" may be viewed from many different perspectives. People trained and sometimes locked into one perspective can scarcely believe there may be others, even less that they are equally authentic and that, for some or all tasks, they may be even more useful than the one with which they were indoctrinated, and as a result, with which they are comfortable.

View PDFchevron_right
International Commercial Arbitration Adrift? : An Analysis of the Conduct of International Commercial Arbitration outside the Confines of a National Legal System
Jude Thaddeus Uchenna Nnodum
View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • International Arbitration
  • Public International Law
  • International Commercial Arbitra...
  • Private law
  • International law (public and pr...
  • International Investment Arbitra...
  • International Commercial Law - a...
  • International Commercial Arbitra...
  • International Arbitration and Li...
  • International Investment Law and...
  • UNCITRAL law
  • ICSID Arbitration
  • Arbitration (International and D...
  • Independence and Impartiality of...
  • Permanent Court of Arbitration
  • UNCITRAL arbitration
    • 580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved