Marginals and Elites in International Arbitration

2020 ◽  
pp. 259-282
Author(s):  
Florian Grisel
Keyword(s):  
Civil Society ◽  
International Arbitration ◽  
Business Law ◽  
Social Strategies ◽  
Global Business ◽  
Commercial Arbitration ◽  
Closed Group ◽  
Unified Field ◽  
Significant Interest ◽  
Structural Differences

This chapter highlights a field that has raised significant interest in recent years: the sociology of individuals who are routinely appointed as international arbitrators to settle the important business disputes that commonly arise in transnational settings. These individuals serve as the private judges of global business law, and their governance functions have grown together with the growth of international arbitration, which is now the preferred method for resolving these disputes. The private nature of these appointments and the creation of a closed group of elite arbitrators have raised important concerns within civil society. The chapter then shows how the elites of international commercial arbitration (ICA) have successfully gained a strong and growing foothold in the burgeoning field of investor–state arbitration (ISA), despite the structural differences between ICA and ISA. Indeed, the elites of ISA and ICA significantly overlap, and have developed similar social strategies to secure legitimacy within the unified field of international arbitration.

Civil Society and International Investment Arbitration

2020 ◽  
pp. 303-327
Author(s):  
Nathalie Bernasconi ◽  
Martin Dietrich Brauch ◽  
Howard Mann
Keyword(s):  
Civil Society ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Public Law ◽  
International Arbitration ◽  
Commercial Arbitration ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Investment Arbitration ◽  
International Investment Agreements

This chapter discusses the role of civil society in international investment arbitration. Much of the civil society focus on international arbitration has been on the investor–state dispute settlement (ISDS) process included in many international investment agreements. However, the historical role of commercial arbitration as the progenitor of investment treaty arbitration and the procedural and structural links between ISDS and commercial arbitration are important for the discussions on civil society engagement. Civil society recognized early on the problems of using a commercial arbitration model for investment arbitration, which involves public law matters, and concluded that this created a misappropriation of a tool that up to that time had only been used for private commercial purposes or very well-defined state-to-state purposes. The crossing of these purposes and actors to create public law arbitration between investors and states is what created this sense of misappropriation and led to a spotlight being shone on the regime by civil society. The chapter then looks back at the beginnings of civil society engagement with international arbitration through the experience with investment treaties, including the advancement of transparency and the ability to submit amicus curiae briefs.

Notes: To stay or not to stay? Admiralty proceedings after the International Arbitration Act 15 of 2017: Atakas Ticaret Ve Nakliyat AS v Glencore International AG

2021 ◽  
Vol 138 (1) ◽  
pp. 40-57
Author(s):  
Dusty-Lee Donnelly ◽  
Seshni Govindasamy
Keyword(s):  
Case Note ◽  
International Arbitration ◽  
Commercial Arbitration ◽  
High Court ◽  
International Commercial Arbitration ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Model Law

The decision in Atakas Ticaret Ve Nakliyat AS v Glencore International AG 2019 (5) SA 379 (SCA) made important remarks to the effect that the discretion to effect a joinder to admiralty proceedings under s 5(1) of the Admiralty Jurisdiction Regulation Act 105 of 1983, and the discretion to refuse a stay of proceedings under s 7(1)(b) of the Act, are ‘untouched’ by art 8 of the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Arbitration that is incorporated under the International Arbitration Act 15 of 2017. The court reached this decision on the basis that, in terms of art 1(5), the Model Law does not affect other laws of the Republic under which matters may not be referred to arbitration, or may only be so referred subject to conditions. This case note analyses the nature and extent of the court’s discretion under art 8(1) of the Model Law, the argument for an implied repeal of s 7(1)(b) of the Admiralty Jurisdiction Regulation Act, the interpretation of art 1(5) of the Model Law, and the questions left unanswered by the judgment. It argues that although the Model Law does not automatically oust the jurisdiction of the high court exercising admiralty jurisdiction to hear a maritime claim, the court only retains a narrow discretion to refuse a stay of those proceedings when an international commercial arbitration agreement exists in respect of the dispute.

Part 1 Fundaments of Arbitration in Brazil, 2 Comments of the Brazilian Arbitration Law

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sester Peter
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
International Arbitration ◽  
Commercial Arbitration ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
Model Law ◽  
New York Convention ◽  
Definition Of

This chapter examines the Brazilian Arbitration Law (BAL) of 1996. The BAL is a standalone act encompassing roughly 40 articles. It is divided into eight chapters and is applicable to both domestic and international arbitration, except for Chapter VI (The Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Awards), which is modelled on the New York Convention (NYC). Hence, the BAL legislator adopted a monistic approach. Consequently, the BAL contains no definition of domestic or international arbitration, but only defines the term foreign award. According to article 34, sole paragraph BAL, an award is considered a foreign award if it was rendered outside the territory of Brazil. The present translation of the BAL builds on the terminology of the UNCITRAL Model Law on Commercial Arbitration and the NYC because both documents inspired the authors of the BAL and are cornerstones of international arbitration. This chapter of the book then provides comments on the BAL article by article.

2 The 2015 Reform of Arbitration

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oda Hiroshi
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
International Arbitration ◽  
Commercial Arbitration ◽  
International Commercial Arbitration ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Institutional Aspects ◽  
The Law

This chapter discusses the 2015 Arbitral Reform. The arbitral reform, which started in 2011, culminated in two sets of laws adopted by Parliament and signed by the president on 25 December 2015. The package comprised the Law on Arbitration of the Russian Federation and the Law on the amendments to the Laws in relation to the adoption of the above law. The latter included amendments to the Law on Commercial Court Procedure and the Law on International Commercial Arbitration. On 27 December 2018, the Law on Arbitration was further amended. The power to grant license to perform functions of permanent arbitral institutions was shifted to the Ministry of Justice. One of the fundamental issues which were contested in the process of the reform was whether the existing regime of segregation of international and domestic arbitration should be abandoned altogether or should be maintained. With the strong opposition from experts of international commercial arbitration supported by the Codification Commission and the President’s Administration, the system of two separate laws, that is, the Law on Arbitration and the Law on International Commercial Arbitration, was maintained. However, organisational/institutional aspects of arbitration, including international arbitration, are now regulated by the Law on Arbitration.

International Arbitration as Private and Public Good

2020 ◽  
pp. 397-420
Author(s):  
Ralf Michaels
Keyword(s):  
Public Good ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Public Law ◽  
State Courts ◽  
International Arbitration ◽  
Commercial Arbitration ◽  
Investment Arbitration ◽  
Public Nature ◽  
Private And Public ◽  
Dispute Resolution Mechanism

This chapter addresses the private and public nature of international arbitration. International arbitration is often characterized as an exclusively private dispute resolution mechanism, sharply distinguished from litigation, which is viewed as public because it is provided by the state. This is clearest for commercial arbitration. Commercial arbitration is initiated on the basis of a private arrangement: a party cannot be subjected to arbitration unless they agreed to it previously. Investment arbitration is a little more difficult to categorize, given its emergence from public international law, its involvement of states as parties, and the frequency with which it deals with public law measures. Indeed, significant differences exist between commercial and investment arbitration. Nevertheless, it too is characterized as a private dispute resolution mechanism at least in the sense that it is resolved by institutions other than state courts. The chapter then evaluates whether arbitration is a private or public good. It also demonstrates the ways in which adjudication by courts combines elements of private and public goods, before finding a parallel combination of private and public good aspects in international arbitration.

The Oxford Handbook of International Arbitration

2020 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Civil Society ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
International Arbitration ◽  
Central Values ◽  
Investment Arbitration ◽  
One Stop ◽  
Environmental Considerations

This Handbook presents and discuss today’s cutting-edge knowledge in the area of international arbitration. It reflects the different ‘languages’ used in the field and offers the reader a one-stop-shop entry into the main things we know and the main ways in which we think about international arbitration today. The Handbook is divided into seven parts. Part 1 provides an overview of the key legal notions needed to understand how international arbitration technically works, such as the relation between arbitration and law, the power of arbitral tribunals to make decisions, the appointment of arbitrators, and the role of public policy. Part 2 analyses some of the main developments that changed the field over the last 15 years, including the rise of human rights concerns, environmental considerations, and the need for greater transparency. Part 3 focuses on key actors in international arbitration, such as arbitrators, parties choosing arbitrators, and civil society. Part 4 examines the central values at stake in the field, including efficiency, legal certainty, and constitutional ideals. Part 5 discusses intellectual paradigms structuring the thinking in and about international arbitration, such as the idea of autonomous transnational legal orders and conflicts-of-law thinking. Part 6 presents the empirical evidence we currently have about the operations and effects of both commercial and investment arbitration. Finally, Part 7 provides different disciplinary perspectives on international arbitration, including historical, sociological, literary, economic, and psychological accounts.

10 Damages in International Arbitration

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Salomon Claudia T
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
The State ◽  
International Arbitration ◽  
Commercial Arbitration ◽  
Business Opportunity ◽  
Reasonable Degree ◽  
Depth Analysis ◽  
Degree Of Certainty ◽  
Standards Of Proof ◽  
Substantive Law

This chapter addresses the implications of the substantive law of the State of New York for the proof and calculation of damages. In international commercial arbitration, the category of damages, as well as the nature of proof required, is determined by the agreement of the parties. Absent such an agreement, tribunals will be guided by the substantive law of the arbitration. And generally, for damages to be recoverable, an aggrieved party must prove that the opposing party’s conduct directly and proximately caused the claimed damages. Although an in-depth analysis of theories and standards of proof for establishing causation is beyond the scope of this chapter, the requirement that a party prove, with a reasonable degree of certainty, damages proximately caused by a respondent’s actions explains New York law’s general skepticism about anticipated lost profits for a prospective business opportunity as a class of damages.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document