UNCITRAL arbitration

This paper explores the assistance that can be had of international arbitration in international insolvency cases. As an operational scheme, they have hitherto operated in separate worlds, by and large without intersecting. They stake-holders need to develop understanding of the applicable laws of arbitration and insolvency, given the acknowledgeable role of international arbitration in the international insolvency proceedings. This paper examines the issue in seven parts.

Part I walks through the structural firmament of international arbitration and insolvency laws, very briefly. Part-II advances perspectives with regard to their processes and applicability operations.    Part-III looks for locus standi of using legally the arbitration in international insolvency cases against the backdrop of E.U. Insolvency Regulation and UNCITRAL Model Law. Part-IV explores enabling mechanism to enable the interaction of two areas, of international insolvency and international arbitration. Leading to Part V, this paper delves into possible uses of arbitration in international insolvency cases. Logically, then Part VI seeks to audit the process- the limitations inherent in the arbitration proceedings (of New York Convention), of processes borne out of relationship between the two and unavoidable features of arbitration. While Part VI explores the procedural limitations, Part VII discusses the possibility of intersection in terms of extant public policy of the stake-holder jurisdiction- the issues of public law qua private law, and assessing arbitration in terms of public policy. In conclusion, a sweeping obiter dicta attendant on the foregoing analysis wraps this paper observing that there is a need to further explore and elaborate the intersection of arbitration proceedings in insolvency context, and that much enterprise could be profitably done in this area.

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.