KluwerArbitration — @ woiteskiswer| Kluner Law international Table of Cases ‘Alan Rede: J. Matin Hunter, Nol Backaby; Constantine Pavtasdes ‘AB (No2) [2007] 1 Lloyd's Rep 358 319 ‘A Raman Golshani viran (2005) Rewe de 10.25 Ibtrage 96, (2008) Global Atration Review 42 ABB AG Hochtet Aiport GmbH [2006] EWHC 388 5.69 (Comm), (2006) rb LR 33 ‘Abu Dhabi Gas Lgutaction Co Lid vEastem — 2.190-2-194, Bechtel Corp [1982] 2 Lloyds Rep 425 CA, (1982) 2.207, 2211, Ott Leg Metra 1057, [1983] Rewede 2218 Itrage 119, 984) Xb Comm Ab 448 ‘Addis v Gramophone Co Lid (1909) AC48B 9.45 ‘Adgas seo Abu Dhabi Gas Liqulaction Co Lid 10.68 'AEK v National Basket Association [2002] 1 All ER (Comm) 70, [2002] Arb LR 49 ‘AIG Capital Partners Ine vKazaketan 2006) Ap 11.147 LR 1020 ‘Alta vOjeh (1986) Reswe dotarbitrage 583 2.164 ‘Aicom Lid vRepublc of Columbia [1964] AC S80 11.148 ‘Al Shipping Caporaton v'ShipyardTrog (1988) 2.150 1 Loyd Rep 643 ‘Aliana SpA and another vWest Tankers Ine, ECS. §:139-6.198 Case 488/07, 10 Febuary 2008, (2008) 12 int ‘ALR 19, 25.) Ab ‘Aimare Prima, The [1986] 2Lloyd's Rep 3782.62 ‘Arerican Bureau of Shipping v Société Jet Flint 2.44 SSA, 170 Fad 349 (2nd Gr 1999) ‘American Safety Equipment Corp vJP Maguce Co, 2.122, 1043, 881 F 24 821 2nd Cir 1968) Angelic Grace, Th [195] 1 Loyd's Rep 87 (CA) 260, 2.61 ‘Arab Afican Energy Corp Ltd VOlieproducten 1.48, 2.18, Nederland BV [1963] 2 Uoyds Rep 419 264 ‘Arab National Bark EI Sha Sacud Bin Masoud 10:38 Bin Hazala El-Abé 2004) EWHG 2381, (2004) AOI ‘Arenson v Azonson [1977] AC 405, (19761 Lloyds 5.44 op 179 HL ‘Achggr ae thers v The Legal Senices 203 Commission and another [2004] EWC 1808, (2004 ab LR 43, (2005) tation 71(1) 1086, [oo ab LR 43 ASM Stipping Ltd v TIM Lid [2006] 1 yes Rep 4.89 376, [2006] Ab LR 103 ‘Asia Ol Co ine vRover Navigation Lid, 344 F34 2.45 216 nd Or 2003) ‘Austem v Cricago Board Options Exchange, 716 F 61 ‘Supp 121 (SONY 1963) ‘Australia, Commonwealth of v Cockatoo Dackyard. 2.154, 2165 Py Lic [i996] 36 NSWLR 662 Australia, Commonwealth of v John Fafax and 2.153 Sons Lid ‘Aula Group nc vNorma J ofCaltoia, 4282.44 F.Supp. 837 (CCNY 1977) ‘Award of 1882, Compary Zand others (Republic of 2.141 Yeradu) v State Organisation ABC (Republic of Utopia) ICCA YB Awards 83 Baker Marine (Na, Lid vChevron (Nig. Lid, 191 F 11.95, ‘3d 194 Qnd Cr 1988) Bank Malt v HalinkiTachnki SA [1984] 0B 291, 2.81, 10.22 [163 3 All ER 428 (Ca) Banque de Paris vAmoco Ol, S73 Supp 1485 2.48 (SONY 1983) Barter itematona ic vAbbott Laboratories, 15 2.123, 1073, F 3d 429 (7th Gr 2008) 11120 Bay Hote and Resort Limited v Cawaior 250 Construction Co Lid [2001] UKPC 34 Baxinco Pharmacalsicas Lid and others v Shamil 2.193 Bank of Baran EC [2004] EWCA Civ 19 Author > Alan Reem > dN Hunter > Nigallackaby > Constantine Parasides ‘Source > Table of Cases in Aan Redo Merén Hunter etal, Reem ‘and Huron International tiation, ‘th (ONigel Backaby, erin Hunter, Constantine Parasides ‘Alan Re: or Unversity Press 2009) pp aieBhatia rtemational vBuik Trading SA [2002] 2 3.43 HKC 105 Biedermann soo Republic ofKazakhstany 6.191 Biedermann iteratonal Bittrowe, Mentzbano, Condon Frerk v Th SupaioeCout of Santa Gara County, 1968 Cal Lexis 2, 1998 WL 1346 Birmingham Associates Lid Abbott Labatoies, 2.45 547 F Supp 24296, 2008 US Dist LEXS 20321 BKM seo Siemens AG Black-Clagan v 3.20 Papierwerke [1981] 2 Lloyd's Rep 446 Borst vAlstate Insurance Compary, 717 NW 244.73 42 (is 2008), Bothell vHitachi Zosen Corp, 97 FSupp 2d 1048 2.20 (2000) Bowen vAmoco Pipaline Co, 254 F 24.925 (10th 10.79, 2001) Braes of Doune Wind Farm (Scotland) vAlfed 3.61 Meflpine Business Senices [2008] EWHC 426 (rec) Brandon v MeePartners he, 203 FRO 677 (SD Fla 9.52 2001) Bromon, he vZapata Ofshore Co, 407 US 111.108, (1972) Bidas SAPIC, Brida Enorgy Intemational Lid otal 2.44, 2.45 VGovemmert of Turkmenistan and Tukmenens, $345 Fad 347 (Sh Creu 2003), [2006] a ALR N- ot Bitish Aways Board vLaker Aways Lis (1985) 9.45 ACES) Buckeye Check Cashing inc v John Cardggna ot 2.95 a, 128 § C1 1204 (2008) Bundes garichtshof decision (1978) 71 BGHZ 162 2.46 Bundesgarichshaf decision 53 NAW 2346 (2000) 2.46 Bundesgarceshof decision BVerS, Beschiuiom 8.49 24012007 - 20 1153104 Bundesgarceshof decision BVerS, Beschiuiom 8.49 2H01 2007 - 20 2247108 Gv [2007] EWHC 1541 (Comm) 3.16-3.20 Cable & Wireless Pe vIBM United Kingdom Lid, 1.127 sub nom Cable & Wireless Pe v IBM UK Ltd {2002} EWE 2069, 2 All ER (Comm) 1041 Caisse Fédérale de Ct Niue du Nerd dela 10.25, France v Banque Delubac et Compacrie (2001) Reso de Mtge 918, CCargi it SA VT Pael Dyberko, 961 F2d 1012 2.44 (2rd ir 1983) Cental Mest Products Lid v.V McDaniel Lid 2.178 [1962] 1 Lets Rep 862 Coelem SA vRoust Holdings Lid [2005] EWGA 7.39 vets Champ vSiogol Trading Co, $5 F 8d 269 (7th Cr 2.188 1985) Channel Tunnel Group Lid v Bao Beaty 1.08, 3.186. Construction Lid (1862) 1 OB 658, [1963] AC 394, 2.188, 3.182, (1968) 109 LOR 37 128, 147 751,784 China Agribusiness Dowelopment Corp vBali 11.59 Trang [1988] 2 Lioyds Rep 76 Ctioe 2 Fisting Co Inc vOdyssey Re (Landon) 2.20, 3.28 Lid, 108 FSupp 2 1048 (80 Cal 2000) CChorzow Factory case (Germany vPolad), 8.97, 8.122, Permanert Court of niemationd ustice 1628) 8123, 8.124, POU Saves A, No 17.147 ost (Christopher Broun Lid v Genosserschaft 5.96 estoreichscher Waldbesiter Wazwnechatsaabe Regtiete GnbH [1954] Comal Aerosenices Ine vAvab Republic of 3.88, 10.03, Eaypt, 909 FSupp 907 (OC 1996), (2008) 19.Arb 1189, 11.88, tt 424, 1214) nl Arb Rap Bo 1195, 1118, 187 (CME Czech Repub BV (Te Netwands) vTho 1.114, 858, Czoch Republi, IC 62 (2003),9 CSI Repars 862, 265, 288 874, ar 814, 19, 8120, 980Cockatoo Dockyard seo Commonweathof 10.25, ‘Australia v Cockatoo Dockyat Ply Lid Cogecot Cotton Company cf Marian Catton industries MCI, (200) Gazette du Palas 118 CCologre national cout decision (1982) Vi Yok 10.52 Comm Arb 345 Colmbia, Republic of vCauca Company et al 4.146 CCommernealth Coatings Cop vContinntal 4.108 Casualty Co, 63 US 145 (1968) CCompagre Tursienre do Navigation SA. 3.4, 261, Compagre divmarent Mantine SA [1971] AC 3.90 57 CConpée Levin NV vKen-Ren Fetlisers and 7.01 CChomicas (1984) 2 Loyd Rep 109 (HL) (Corey vNow York Stock Exchango, 691 F 2d 1205 6.51, 5.62 (Gh Gr 1962) Cory Channel case 6.185 Cot vAAA, 785 F Supp 970(NDCa 1962) 8.54, 5 55 Cour de Cassetion (1 Ch Cy decision of 6 uy 2.125 2005 (2006) 4 Rev Arb 8 CCzoch Republic vOME Czech Republic BV, Svea 9.162 out of Appeal, Case No T 8735-01, 1C 62 (2008) Dadouran Group ntomational and othors v Sims 2.45, 9.152 arc cher [2008] EWHC 2973 (CH, (2005) ALR. Bi Daico soe Municipal do Khoms ElMergeb | 11.20, Dalle vBank Molt (1885) OB 441, (1986) 4 Yok (Comm Ao 547 Daimia Corent Lid vNational Bark of Pakistan 1.160) [1975] 28 9, (1974) 2 Loyd Rp 98 Daimia Dairy ndusties Lid vNatonal Bank of 6.103, Pakistan (1978) 2 Loy Rep 223, Dal Morte Corp v Sunkist Growers, 10F 94.753 4.73 (ith Gr 1093) Deutsche Schachthau und Tifbotrgesclschat 9.182 (Gb (FG) vFtas Al Khaimah National Ot Co (Fras Al Kaman, UAE) Shal Intemational Petroleum Co Ltd (UK) 1987] 3 WLR 1023, [1990] AC 295 Doling-Baker vMerett (1991) 2AIER600 2.149 Egon Oldendor vLibetia Coperaton [19962 3.200, ayes Rap 14 Egon Oldendor vLibetia Copcraton (No 2) [1996] 3.200, 2 Loyes Rep 380 Eqgypt, Arab Republic of vSauthem Pacilc 6.105, Propeties Ltd and SPP (Mie East) Ltd, Cour ‘dAppal de Pats, § iy 1984 Elekrim SA v vend (2007) EWHC 11 (Comm) 1.247 Emmott vMichael Wison & Partners Ltd (2008) 9212 EWA OW 184" Employers surance Co of Wausau vCantuy 2.207 Indemnity Co, No O5-3437 (Mtn Ce) Etat Libanais vSociete FTML (Calis) SAL, 17 bly 294 2001 Ethignean Olsoods Pulses Export Corp vRio Dal 2.61 "Mar Foods Ie [1890] 1 08 85 ttyl Cop v United Steowerkors of America, 768 10.79, 2d 180(CA 7 1985) Exodss vRicch France (2004) Rewe dearitrage 10.25, a3 F & GSykos (Wessex) Lid vFine Fare Lid 1967] 96 1 Loyd Rep 53 Fairchild and Qo ine v Richmond F and PR Co, 516 4.131 F Supp 1205 (00 1981) Feral Aitraton Act iterretation case, 181. 4.108 ALR Fed 1 (1858) Fédération do Russie VBNP Paribas (Suisse) SA 11.149, CCompagrie NOGA dimpotaton er dExportaion SSA. Swiss Federal Supeme Cout decision 5A 6182007 of 10 January 2008 and decision ‘4640972008 of 9 December 2008 Fl Stioping Co Lid v Premium Nata Products Lid 3.13 (2007) UcHL 40Flora Trust & Holding Cop and othars vu 2.24, 2.58, Pualov and cers (2007) EWCA Civ20, [2007] 2.61, 2.99, LUKHL 40, [2007 1 All ER (Camen) 894 2138, 313, 596 Fletarentos Martins SA vEffotn Intemational 2.61 BY [1995] 2 Lioyts Rep 304 Foupare seo also Banque de Poche Cent 10.19, Fugeralle vProcatance (1982) Ok 974 Fronch-Mexicen Claims Commission cases 4.146 Gakis case, Cass Cv? May 1968, DS 1986, 575.294 arity vLyle Stuart Ine, 40 NY 2d 354, 253 NE 24 9.47 ‘720 (1976) Gateway Tech. ne VMCI Telecomms Corp, 64 F 10.79 34983 (Btn Cr 1966) Gemsta-TV Guide Intemational ne vHey © 9.147 Yoon, 2007 NY Misc Lexis 7245, German Federal Supreme Cout decisionof 110.84 Fetruery 2001, (2001) No 1 RPS 14 Gicardosi vMister of Highaays (BC) (1996) 584.135 DLR (2) 469 Gacobassi Gran Vini SpA vRen ed Cap 2.185, (1967) US Dist. LEMS 1783 Glencore Lid vSelnitzer Stet Products, 189 F 34 2.106 26 (2nd Or 1999). GWAC Commer Credit LLC vSprings Inds, 171 F 2.48 ‘Supp 2d 200, 2001 US Dist LEXS 8182, 44 UCC. Rep Serv 24 Gad Coast Lid v Navel Gijon SA (2006) EWH 9.199 ‘1044 (Coren, [2005] Ab LR 381 Gossat case, Cour do Cassation, 1 Chil 2a4 Chamber 7 May 1963 Dalz 1963) 545 Grainger Associates vThe Islamic Republic of kan, 9.193 The Rado and Teloision Organisation ofan ota (1967) 16 ran CTR 317 (Groon Toe Firancial Corp vBazzle, 639 US 444 2199-2208, (2003) Grntal & Co ne vRonald Steinberg eta, BASF 2.48 ‘Supp 324 (ONY 1994) Hall Steet Associates LLC v atl Inc, 128 US S 9200, 1073, (1 1386 (2008)| 10.74, 1079 Hallmark Capital Corporation Ine, 534 F Supp 24 7.44 951 (© Minn 2007) Hipam Hapa [2007] EWCA Gv 291 3.2, 3196 Harbour Assurance Co Lid vKanea General 2.99 Intemational Insurance Co Lid (1984) 1 Loyd Rep 455 Hassnoh Insurance Co of lsral vMew 198]2. 2.149, 2.169 Loyes Rap 243 Hofer lematinal ne vCristiansen [2007] 2.18 WHC 3018 (TCC) Howlett Packard Co vThw Computer Specialists 2.45 lnc, No 08 Clv 0860 (RPP), 2007 US Dist LEMS {571 (SONY 15 May 2007) Hayman v Danis Lt [1942] AC 356 290 Hiscox v Outwcite[1992] AC 582 3.69, 370 Howard Unversity vMtopoltan Campus Paice 10.26 Off ca’s Union, 519 FSupp 2427 (006 2007) Howsam v Dean Witter Reynolds in, 837 US 79, 1.85 4235 C1588, decided 10 December 2002 Industotech Constructor Ine vDeke University 2.185, (1964) 67 NC App 741, 314 S E24 272 Irsigma Technology Co Lid vAlstem Technclogy 1.88, 1.156 Lc (2008) SGHC 134 Integy Insurance Co vAmarican Centinnial 7.37 Insurance Co, 885 F Supp 69 (1995) Intl Corp vAdanced Micro Douces inc, 542US 7.41, 7.43, 214, 24'S Oi 2466, 159 Ed 2d 365 (2004) 7.48 Intemational Electic Cop vBtidas Sociedad 10.20 ‘Aoorima Petrolera Inaustal ¥ Commercial, 745 F ‘Supp 172 (SDNY 1950) Irteqretaion f Peace Teaties with Bulgaria, 4.146 Hungary and Romania, IC) Ais Opirion Ising Teritry of Curacao v Salton Devees Inc, 4.132 358 F Supp 1 (USDC, SONY 1973) ain ve Mid, 51 F 34 686 (7th Cr 1995) 356JM Industries Ine and others vStat-Nelsen SA 2.45, and hers, 387 Fs 163; 2008 US App LENS pa “kin Forster Emma v Michael Wison & Partners. 2.151 Lined (2008) EWCA Civ 184 Jar Lafr Energy Company SCA (Morocco) vAMCI 11.75 Export Corporation (US) SC Sutrotogat vPresdert & Fallows of Hones. 2.208 College, SDNY 04 Civ6068, 11 October 2007 KIS Naja A'S vHyund Heayy Industes Co Lid 4.195 [1981] 1 Lioyts Rep 260, (1992) 08, 191] 1 Uoyas Rep 524 Kabler vMidane Bank Lt [1950} AC 28 3o1 abn Lucas Lancaster Ine vLak Itemationl Lid, 2.20 +185 Fad 210 (1968) anova and others v Guiness (2006) EWCA CW 11.59, 11.73 22, (2006) AMDLRSTS Kaplan VMK Investments Inc (US), 115 $C 1900 6.128, (1985), 131 LE 24 985 (1995) Kazakhstan, Republc of vBiedermann Tat F 3d 880 (Sth Gir Kazakhstan, Republe of vistl Geoup Ine [2004] 10:38, cB 579 Kyocera Cop vPrudentia- Bache Trade Senices 10.78 Inc, 341 F 3d 987 (@h Cr 2003) La Donna Ply Lid v Word AG [2005] VSC.359 2.185, LachmarvTrunkline LNG Co, 753 F248 dC 2.48 1685) Lady Mure, Tho [1996] 2 HKC 320 (CA) 343 Landesgercht Hambug Judgment 19 December 2.60 1967 [1968] Arblrle Rechtsprank 138 LaPine Technclogy Corporation vKyacera 10.76-10.78 Corporation, 190 F 34884, 341 F 34 998,909 10.79, Supp 697 (ah Gr 1997) Lesotho Highlands Deseloomert Authority v2.09, 9.41 Impeaglo Sp and others [2005] UKHL 43, (2006) 9.42, 10.48, AC 21, [2006] WLR 129, [2006] Arb LR SS7, 10.68, (20085) 21 At nt 4 LLETOO see Liberian Eastem Timber Corporation LUerian Eastem Timber Coporalon (LETCO) vThe 8.28, 11.148 Goverenont of the Roputic of Liberia, 650 F Supp 73 (SDNY 1988), 659 F Supp 608 (000 1987), 26, ILM 647 (1987) (1987) 2ICSID Redew FL 1887 Lind Case (2007) 3 Stockhoim Intl Arb Rev 1674.89 LINC Inestmonts inc vRepublic of Nicaragua, 118. 11.147 F Supp 2 358 (SONY 2000) Lovelock (EAR) Lid VExportes [1968] 1Uoyss 2.178 ep 163 Lundigen v Freeman, 307 F 2d 104 (th Gir 1962) 8.51 Macran at ID cl SCAP (2003) Reswe de Abtrage 10.43, 7 Mangstaununaiga Ol vUnited Word Tade ne 2.178 [1905] 1 Loyts Rep 617 Mare Rich Co AG v Socita Italiana krpianti PA 6.130, 8.136, (The Atlantic Emperor [1989] 1 Loyds Rep 548 6.127 (CA), [1900] 1 Lovers Rap 942 (ECL), (1887) 13, ‘A il 33 Marketing Dsplays Intemational le VR Van 9.102 Rate Reciamo BV, Dutch Court of Appeal, Case No 04694 & 04/695 (udgment of 24 March 2005) Meadows inert Co Lid vNutmeg Insurance 7.37 (Co, 187 ERD 42 (MD Tern 1954) Metaigeselschaft AG vMIV Capitan Constante 9.25 and Yacimientos Petrlfors Fiscales, 790 F 24 20 nd Cr 1986) MGM Productions Geup nc vAarol ot Russian 11.105, ‘Ainlines 2008 WL 234871 (2nd Cr (NY) Mictaol M Pret © vOnemall Coporation, 73 Fed 9.123, ‘Appx 720 (2003) Milos Soak and Blophysica nc v huge 3a Pharmaceutical Co, 289 F 20 615 (ath Cr 2002)Mitsubishi Motors Cop vSolerChyster Plymouth 2.114, 2.122- Inc, 473 US 614, 105 S C1 3346 (1985), (1986) 2.123, 2.126, Yok Comm Ach 555, 87 LEd 24444 (1985) 2.120, 3.120, 847, 1043, 11.108, 11.420, Monagasque de Reassurance SAM (Merde Re)v. 11.58 INAK Nattogart of Ukraine and State of Ukraine, BIT F 2d 48 (2002) Morelite Construction Corp v New York Cty District 4.109, Carpenters Benefit Funds, 748 F 24 79 (1964) Mousaka vGolden Seagull Mastime [2001] 2 10.87 LUoyas Rep 657, (2001) Arb LR 505 Muricpalté de Khoms El Merib ci Socisté 8.31 Daca Musaai VRE itematonal (UK) Ltd & others 3.196 [2007] EWHC 2861 National Broadcasting Co le vBtear Stoams & Co 7.37, 7.41, Inc, 165 F 9 184 (2nd Cir 1899) 7a National Power Corporation (Ptilippines) v 2.198 Westinghouse (USA), ATF 1191 380, National Thermal Pover Coporation vThe Singer 10.23, Cop etal, 1982 (3) 7 Jutgemerts Today SC 198, Naver Amazoria Peruana SA vCompania 3.84, 268 Intemacional de Seguros de Peru (Pern Issuance’) (1985) 1 Lloyds Rep 116 Naw Regency Productions Ie VNepon Heald 4.89 Fms ln, S01 Fd 1101 (th Gir 2007) Noble Assurance Company and Shall Povoleum 3.20 Inc v Gating Konzem Genera Insurance Company UK Branch [2007] EWHC 25322 (QAO Nathem Shipping Company v Remacadores 5.69, 10.55 De Marin SL (Remmay) [2007] EWHC 182 CChorandesgaricht Frankfurt decision of 24 261 ‘September 1985 (1860) XV Yok Comm A 666 (1 & Natural Gas Commission vWestem 10.28 CCompary of Nath Armecca (1867) Al Ikan Reports SC 674 (ONGC v Saw Pipes Lu (2008) § SOC 705 1083 (tion Campania Espandla de Segures vBalbot 2.138 “Maatschaprj Veor Algemene Verzegingeen [1962] 2 Lets Rep 257 (nus Ga, Re, 2007 US Dist Lexis 24061 (ON 7.44 2007) Panevazys-Salutishis Railay (Estonia v 805 Lithuania) (1939) POL Reports Seve VB 97 Pais Cour Cappel decision of 11 January 1996, 8.200, 351 Parklane Hosiery Co vShore, 439 US 222 (1978) 9.182 Parsons Whiterere Overseas Conc vSociété 1009, 1049, CGénrale do Mrdustie du Papier (RAKTA), 08 11.64, 11.72. 24968 (2nd Gr 1874) 11.77, 11.106, 11.408, 1.474 PPassalacqua (Wm) Builders v Resnick Developers, 2.44 £988 Fad 131 (2nd Cir 1991) Patel v Patel (Urreported Court of Appeal 128 judgment, 24 Merch 199) Pedcor Mot Co Inc Wale Benefit Pian vNAm 3.28 Idem, 243 Fd 355 (Sth Cr 2003) Pennzoil Exploration ad Production Co vRamco 261 Energy Lid, Case 96-20407 Peruian Insurance case see Navera Amazeria Peruana SA Peterson Fans le vC& M Farming Ltd (2008) 2.45 ‘All ER (0) 50 (Feb), [2004] Arb LRS73 Philippine Republic caso (1977)B Ver GEA2 1.146 Philip Petrcieum Co kan vThe Islamic Repable 90 ‘fan (1989) 21 kan US CTR 79 Pickens v Templeton [1994] 2 NLR 718 551 Poi vTper, Cass Clviiste, 14 February 2008, 1.127 (2008) A ie Vol 19 no:3p 963, 2004) Raw tb fo. 2 pac Premium Natta Products Ltd VF Shipping Oo Lid 6.95 and others [2007] UKHL 40 Pima Paint Cop vFlood Conkin Manufacturing 2.60, 2.95, Cop, 388 US 295, 87 § Cl 1801, 18 LEdod 1270 (167)ime Therpoutcs LLC vOminicare he, 5 F 10.73, 10.74 ‘Supp 2d 995 (D Winn 2008) Protech Prjecs Corstucton Pty) id vA- 10.83, ‘har & Sons 2006] EWHC 2165 (Cone), (2005) ab LR 671 PT Garuda Indonesia virgen Air(2002]1SLR 3.87 390 (CA) CCatar, Ruler of vinemational Marine Ol Corpary 2.193 Lit (1956) 20 tL Rp 534 RvMomdou and others (2005) EWCA Ci 177 3.228 Rena K, The [1979] QB 377, [1978] 1 Loyds Rep 2.183 548 Richardson vMllsh (1824) 2 Bing 229, 16244) 10.85, 11.103 AER 255 Rookes vBamard [1964] AC 1129, [1967] 1 Loyts 8.45 Rep 28 (HL). Rotterdam Disvct Court decision of 17 Februay 9.49 1005, NIP.R. 1996 205, Roussel-Ucalv GD Seare Oo [1978 1 Leyes Rap 2.45 (225 (1979), 4 Yok Comm Arb 317 Foz Trading, Inve, 469 F Supp 2d 1201 (NDGa7.41-7.48, 745, 2008) Rubenstein vOttetoury, 357 NYS 2d 62 (NY Mise 5.62 1873) Rufgas AG v Marathon Oll Co, §28 US 574 (1299) 2.45 Sabotage cases 4.146 ‘Sangh Palyestors Lid (ra) v The Intemational 3.192, 9:74, Imester (KCFC) (Kava) (2000] 1 loys Rep 460 10.68) ‘Sappho lnlomatonal Petroleum Lid vTho National 2.115 tartan Ol Company (1964) 13 1COL 1011 ‘Saud Arabia vAablen American Ol Company 2.141 (@ameo) Scherk vAlborto Giver, 417 US 608 (1974) 2.60, 2.128 ‘check vAlberto iver Co, 417 US 506 (1974) 1.108 Shanghai Foodstus Inport & Export Copy 10.73, Intemational Chemical re No $8 CV $820, 2004 US Dist Lexis 1423 (SONY 2004) ‘Shoarson vMeMahon, 482 US 220, 107 $ C2902 2.128 (1867) ‘Shah Abu Dhabi vPetrleun Dowlopment Lid 2.193, (1982) 1010247 Siemens AG and BKM Inustiniagen GmbH v_— 1.108, 1.180, Duco Construction Company, Cass Gv tre, 7 2188) anuay 1992, (1962) 1 Bull Civ na2, (1982) 1 19 SDI7OF, (1994) ADALI 36, ‘Smith Ervonv Sith Coganeration itemiona, 2.45 198 Fd 88 (2nd Gir 1969) Smith Lid vH ntomational [1991] 2 yas Rep 3.39 a SNE vChamie de Commerce nteretional, Cour 1.178 ‘dAppal de Pats, tere Chambre section C, 22 enuary 2008, SNE vOytec Industries BV, Cass 1, 4 June 2008 10.83, SNE SAS vChambre de Commerce niemationale 5.63 SNF SAS vOytec Indust, Pais Cout of Appeal 2.125 adgmert of 23 Mach 2006 SNF SAS vOjtec Indust, Tibural do Promiéro. 2.125 Instance de Brutal Jugmert of 8 March 2007 Snyder vith, 736 F 24409 (7th i 1984) cert 3.86 ‘erted, 469 US 1037 (1984) Société Fashion Box Group SPA vSocistb AL 10.49, Hoolstone LLC (2006) Rowe de tArtrage 857 Soclte Leng dar vSocidte Patan SPA (2007) 10.49, Reno de Mtitrage 933, ‘Societe Omenex ef Hagen 331 Sooité PT Prabal Adyamulia Société Rena 3.75 Holcing ot Soisté Mrugotia Est Epices (2007) Rew de Mba 507 ‘Société Sarisud, Cour CAppet de Pars (First Ql 7.20 CChambe), (1894) Rowe de rArbitrage 331 ‘Solimany vSclimany (1999) 08 785 3.102-3.108, 4.108 ‘Sonatrach Petroleum vFell Wtematonal (2002). 3.212, 11.108 TAIERES7 ‘Spier vTecrica, 71 F Supp 24 279 (SONY 1998) 11.95‘Sport Maska Inc vZitrerm [1968] 1 SCRS64 8.51 Spring Hope Rockwod vindustil Clean Airin, 3.88 504 F Supp 1385 (1881 Standard Bent Gass Co vGlassrabots Oy, 388 2.20 Fg 40 (34 Cr 2003) Stanton vPaine Webber Jacksen Curtis he, 685 F 7.37 ‘Supp 1241 (SD Fla 1988) Star Shipping AS vChina Natonal Foreign Tae 2.179 Transpatation Corp [1985] 2 Llyels Rep 445 (CA) State of New York Dopatmentof Taxation and 9.129 Finance valent, 57 AD 24 174, 86 NYS 23 797 StoNalson SA vAnimel Foods Item Carp, 2008 2.106 ‘WL 4779682 (nd Gir 4 Nov 2008) SiolAblson SA vColanese AG 400F 24567 5.18 (2rd cir 2005) Sudarshan Chopra & Others vOompany Law 257 Board & Others (2004) 2Azb LR 24% Sutclife vhackrah [1974] AC 727, [1974)1 8.44, 551 Loves Rap 312 HL ‘Swedish Court of Appeal, Stockhaim, Decision of 294 19 June 1960; (1961) 201M 89 ‘Suiss Fodoral Supreme Cout decision o 1 June. 10.57 2001, [2001] Bull ASA 565 ‘Swiss Federal Tabunal decision oft ly 2008, 10.48 4.832004, ASA Bul 1/2005 139 ‘Swiss Federal Tabunal docision of 7 January 2004, 10.48 {4P.196/2003, ASA Bul, 312004 592 ‘Swiss Supreme Cout anniment of CAS avard, 10.24 ‘4 17212006, 22 March 2007 Sykes, FG (Wessex) vFine Fare Ld(1967]1 2.60 Lloyd Rep 53 SSyska ard anatherv Vind and thers (2008) All 2.190 ERO) Tami Nadu Electricity Board vSTOMS Electic 3.10 Company Private Limited [2007] EWHG 1713 (Comm Targie of Proha-Vitaer caso [1962}61C16 84, 11.14 TamoRto SA ESP vElectif cadora Del Allertico 10.03, 11.95 SSAESP, 421 F Supp 2487 (DC Gr 2006), 487 F ‘3d 928 (BC Cir 2007) Thalés Ar Defence vGE Eucomissie et dl Pais 2.125, 3.195 Cour cpp decision of 18 Nowerber 2004, Case No 2oczie0092 Thyssen Canada Lid vMariana Maritime SA and 10.25, aretha [2006] EWHC 218 2005] Arb LR 915 Tan Corporation vAleatel CIT SA (2005) 20% Yok 3.59 Comm Ato 139 Testor AB vSmallbone (No 2) [2001] 1 WLR 1177 2.45 TWS Holdings Ine VMKT Secures Carp, 680 2.45 NvS 23891 Un:Kod v Sociét Ouratal 32 LUnicn of nda vMcDonnall Douglas Carp [1953] 2.3.12, 3.54 Loves Rap 48 United indus Workers vGow ofthe Vi, 987 F.2d 10.26, 12 United States Lines inc ota (US) vAmecan 2.129 Stoamship Ouners Mutual Protecion ard Irdemnity Association le etal (US) (25 Cir 1 Nov 1198), 998 YBCA 1057 (2000) United States vPanhande Eastem Cap et al, 672 2.48 F Supp 149 (0 Dal 1987) United States vParhande Eastom Cap ot a 672 2188-2187 F Supp 149 (0 Dal 1987). 118 FRD 346 (0 Det 1988) United Stoelnorkers of America v Enterprise Wheel 9.123, (Car Corp, 383 US 58% (1960) Van User Matime vDecoLine, ECJCaseC- — §:131-8.192 301/95, [1906] 2 WLR 1181 Vee Networks Lid vEconet Wireless inematinal 5.105 Ld (2008) EWHE 2909 (QB), 2004] Arb LR 729, ‘Venture Gcbal Engineering v Satyam Computer 10.23, 1.97 Sendoos Lid and another, 253 Fed Agpx 517 (CA 6 (tien, (2008) NSC 40 ‘Vimar Seguros y Reaseguros SA vMIV Sky 10.45 Roofer, 515 US 528 (US S C1995)‘Vynlars Case (1608) 8 Co Rep 80a 133 Walter Rau Nousser Onl Und Felt AgvGoss 2.24 Pac ¢ Trading Lid (2005) FCA 1102 Wames SAA Hare tematonal Lis (1994) 2.58, ‘Atitration ae Dispute Resclutton Law Joumal 65 Wellington Associates Ltd vMir Kit Mehta (2000). 2.57 480c272 West Tarkars vRAS (the Front Comcr) 3 Westacre nestments Inc vJugoimpat-SPDR 11.105 Holding Co Li [1889] 2 loys Rep 65 (CA) ‘Wako vSwen, 348 US 427, 74°S C1182 (1953) 2.128, 10.73, ‘Willoughby Roof ng Supply Cov Kalina oar Irtemaional Ine, 776 F 23 269 (11th Gir 1985) ‘Wool Clis Remenel Senico (1948) 1KB 11 2.60 Wer Tad Coparation Lid v Gzamkow Sugar Lid 10.48 (2004) Ewne 22 ML insurance Lid vOwens Corning [2000] 2 Lioyts 3.20, Rep 600 Zomerman v Continental Aitines ne, 712 F 2485 2.129 (ear 1983) page oat KluwerArbitration — @ woiteskiower| Kluner Law international Table of Arbitration Awards ‘Alan Rede: J. Matin Hunter, Ngo Backaby; Constantine Pavtasdes ‘AAA Case No 137 1810031007 6.246 ‘AAPL seo Asian Agiculural Products Lid ‘ABI Group Contractors Ply vTansf el Ply Lid, 224 (1980) Maaloy's irl Arb Rep Val 14 Not pp G-1-G- 40, (1999) YON Yok Car Ab 591 ADC Aff ate Linted and ADC & ADMC 8.29, 89%, Management Limited vthe Republe of Hungary, 8.97, 8.121 ICSID Case No ARBIOG/6, IC 1 2006) 20 ‘Aagis soo Associated Electic and Gas Insurance Senioos Lid ‘Aguas dl Tuna SA vThe Republic f Balla, 822 ICSID Case No ARIO2/3, IC 8 2005) ‘Al Trade Finance Inc vBulgaran Foreign ade 2.162 Bank Lid Mealeys intl Arp Rep Val. 15, Issue 12 at page At ‘Alabama Claims Avbtratlon 1872, Suney of 1.201, 9.187 Trtemational Abiveions 1794-1870 (1976) No.9 ‘Aloe Vera of America Inc (US) vAsinic Food (8) 11.78, 11.102 Pe Lid (Singapore) and ancer (2007) 3041 Yok (Comm Ao 489, ‘Ambassaro do la Fédiration de Russia en France 11.149 \Compagnie NOGA dinporation e ¢Expotation SSA (2001) 1 Rewwa de Mbitrage 114, 2001) V1 Yok Comm ao 273 ‘Armco Asia Corporation v ho Republic of 3.143, 2139, Indonesia, (1885) 24LM 1022, 69 LR 552 ‘ro ‘Ameo Corporation and others vThe Republic of 2168-2167 Indonesia, (1883) 1 ICSID Reprts 410 ‘American Bureau ol Shipping Tencara SpA, 2.24 ltalan Cote di Cassazione, Plenary Session, 28 ‘Jane 2001, No 8744; (2002) 26 Yok Comm Ab 500 ‘American Indopendent OOo ne Arinal) v1.6, 1.185, Goverenont ofthe State of Kuve (1862) 21 LM 2.182, 2118, 978 3120, 3148- 3.160, 6.33, 642, 851- 652 6.70, 955 ‘American Manufacturing Tracing Ine vRepublic of 8.28, 8.72, Zale, 5 ICSIO Reports 10 ans ‘Aminil See American Independent Cll Co Inc Author > Alan Reem > dN Hunter > Nigallackaby > Constantine Parasides ‘Source > Table of Artitration ‘wardsn lan Rete {1Nirin Hunter etl Reem and Hunton International Atta, ‘th (ONigel Backaby, Nesan Hunter, Constantine Parasides ‘Alan Re: or Unversity Pross 2009) pms oie‘Aatiles Cement Coportin (Puerto Rico) v Trans 11.85 cca (Spain) (2006) 2004 Yok Caren Ab 48 Aaicine Goetz and others vRepubie du Bure, 8.74, 8.78 ICSID Case No ARIS 3, 1C 6 (1090) Applied Industal Materials Copp vOvelar Makne 2.109 Tearet Ve Sarayi AS, No OS Gv 10540, 2006 WL ‘1816383 (SDNY 28 June 2006) ‘Aramco abitvation seo Sau Arabia v Arabian ‘American Ol Compary, ‘Asian Agicuftural Products Lid (AAPL) v 8.09, 850, Democratic Socialist Republic of Si Lanka, ICSD 72, 8.116, Case No ARBIS7IS, IC 18 (1880), (1961) 6ICSID 8117 Rosdew-Foregn Inestment Law Joured 528 Associated Electric and Gas insurance Senices 2.189, 2.163, Lid (Aegis) vEwropean Reinsurance Co of Zurich 2207, 8147 [2003] UKPC 11, (2003) 1 WLR 1041, (2008) Arb tt 1914) 404, (2005) Ab LR 29 ‘Augi.NSU Auto-Urion AG (Germary) v Adon Petit 11.101, Cio (Belgium) (1880) V Yok Comm Ab 257 ‘Austrian Supreme Court Judgment of 18 November 3.182 1182, (1984) Yok Comm Ab 161 ‘Autopsta Concessionaa do Venezusia CA v8.62 Bolharian Republic of Venezuela, OSID Caso No ARBIOOIS IC 20 (2003), 10ICSID Reports 309 AWG Group v Argentine Republic (Challenge 4.115 Decision of 22 October 2007) ‘Azutix Cop v Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No 8.48, 861 ‘ARBVOAI2, C24 2006) 874, 876, 877, 828, 8.123, 0124, 9a Banque de Proche Olek vSociete Fougerale, 3.182 Cour de Cassstion, Cv 28m, 9 December 181 (2rd decison), Cour do Cassation, Civ er, 22 (October 1901, (1983) Rewe de ftitrage 3 Boltrric case (1983) Rewe dorAaritage 32.141 Bentler v Belgium (1986) 8 European Commercial 7.56 Cases 101 BG Group plc vArgontine Republic, IC321 (2007) 4.91, 8.56, 867 Bator Gauf (Tarzaria) Lid vUvted Republic of 825, 8.8, Tarwania IOSID Case No ARBIO522, IC 330 8107 (2008) Bobbie Brooks inc (USA) vLani co Water Bane 11, 'SaS (lay), (1979) Yok Comm Ab 289 oaks vAAA, 517 NW 24771 (Mich App 1994) 5.62 BBP soe Bui Petrleurn Compary (Libya) Lid Braspetro Oi Serices Compary (Brasai)vThe 9.15. Managorert and Implementation Author of the Great Man-Made River Project, Pars Cour dnp, (1960) Maaly's rl Arb Rap 8, (1869) 200Va Vo (Comm Ato 297 Broran Gout of Appeal decision of 30 September 11.73, 1900 (2001) 4 ir ALN Bish Petroleum Company (Libya) LidvThe 1.185, 3.146 Goverment of the Libyan Arab Repubic (1979) 53 3.146, 6.116, ILR297, Yok Comm Arb 88, (1982) 62LLR. 140, 6.204, 9.55 (196) #7 LM 14 Bulbark see Bugarian Foreign Trae Bank Lid Bulgarian Foreign Trade Bank Lid Bubark) vA1 321 Trae Finance ine (2001) XVI Yok Comm Arb 291 Burkinabo des Certs 2t Matériaux (MAT) v 10.49, Société dos Cimonts Abidjan (SCA), (2001) Rene de Mbitrage 165, Camuzz! Intemational SA v Argentine Reputic, 491, 843, ICSID Case ARBVO2, IC 41 (2005) Ceskoslovenska Obchach Barka AS vThe Siok 8.28, Republic, ICSI Case No ARBIST, IC 49 (1988) Ctullenge Decision of 11 January 1996, (1857) 20a 4.97 You 227 China Nanhai Ol Joirt Senice Con vGee Tai 11.81, 11.82 Halcings Co Lid (1995) X Yok Cor Ab 671 CIMAT see Burkirabe des Ciments at Matérioux Cty Oferte vogue of Ecuador and 527 Petroocuada,ICSID Case No ARBIO21, IC-309 (2007)(OMS Gas Transmission Company vThe Republc S87, 8.27, ‘f Argentina, ICSID Case No ARBIOVB, C64 8.42, 845, (2008), (2008) 42.LM 788 854, 8685, art an 8.124, 8125 958, CComparia do Aguas dl Accnuja SA and Vien 4.103, 4.124, Unversal vArgantine Repub, ICSID Case No» 841, 8.48, ‘AREY 97, C68 2001), IC 70 (2002) C307 8.50, 871 (2007, (2002) 41 LM 1138, 2002) 17 ICSID Rew 874, 8.83, Foreign Inestmert LI 168, (2004)6 ICSD Rep 890, 8.7, $300, (2004) 125 LR 46 ait CComparia del Desaraio de Santa Elena SAV 852, 8.90, Republic of Costa Rica, ICSID Case No ARBISG/1, 891, 9.80, C73 (2000) Continertal Casualty Co vArgrtine Republic, 8.106, ICSIO Case No ARS/OG 9, 1C 536 (2008) Corcoran v Anda Insurance Company Lid, &2F 2182 124.31 (2nd Cir 1868, (1989) MV Yok Coren A> 1773, (1991) Yo. Comm Ab 683, 1982) XV "Yok Comm Azo 666 Copporacion Transracioral do imesiones SA do 10.63, GV VSTET itemaional SpA and STET Intemational Nethxtands NV (1899) 45 OR (2) 183 (Om SCS) Cour de Cassetion decison ofS January 1999 2121 Creighton Lid (Cayman islands) vMinister of 11.142-11.144 Finance and Minster of ktemal fairs and Agicuturo of the Goverment f the State of Qatar (2000) 90 Yex Comm Av 468, (2007) 1 Rewe de Tasbitrage 114,15 Mealeys Int Ab Rep 9 Cubic Detence Systems v Chamie de Commerce 10.57 Irteationl (1998) Rewe de tAritrage 103, (2001) Ree de FArirage 511 Desert Line Projects LLC Republic of Yeran, 8.24 ICSID Case No ARBIOS/17, IC 319 (2008) Daw Chemical France see Soci Dow Chemical France Eco Saiss China Time Lid vBenettonitomtional 2.124-2.125, INV, Netheiands Hoge Raad Case C-128/97, 2.102, 1131 [1969] €OR 13056, (1980) 0 YEk Comm Ab 3.196, 10.85, 48D, (1990) 200V Yok Carn Ab 629, Mealy’ It 11.118, ‘Ab Rep 146) (Aue 1990) B-1 Eaypt, Arab Republic of vSauthom Pacthe 11.76, Properties (1884) 23 LM 1048, (1984) Yo (Comm At 113, 1985 XY Caren Arb 487, (1988) Bus LS 1 Paso Enagy Intemational Comgary Argentine 8.58, 8.112 Republi, ICSID Case No ARBIO3/1S, IC 8 (2008) Elettonica Sicula SpA (ELS) (United States of 8.76 ‘Arerica vty), (1888) 15 ICJ Reports 76 milo Agustin Mafezin vkingcom of Spain, ICSID 627, 8.38 Case No ARBIS7/7, IC 4 (1968), C85 (2000), 829, 8.42, (2001) 16 CSD Revew-Foragn Imestment Law 865, 8.101 exrnal 22 Empresas Lucchett| SA and Lucchatti Peru SAv 8.14 Republic of Poy, ICSD Case No ARBIO3/4, IC 88 (2008), (2004) 19 1CSID RowewFareign Inestment La Joumal 369 Encara Corporation vReputic of Ecuador, LO 8.65 Case No UNG481, IC 91 (2006), 12 ICSID Reports ar Encyclopaedia Universalis SA (Luxembourg)y 11.84 Encyclopaedia Brtannca ln: (US) (2005) XX Yok Conn Aa 136 Enron Corporation and Ponderosa Assets LP v8.26, 8.52, ‘Acgotine Republic, ICSID Case No ARBION/,IC_B.5, 861 82 (2004), IC 282 (2007), 871, 8128 Esso Austra Resouces Lid anders vThe 2.181 Honourabie Sidney James Plowman and others (1985) 193 CLR 10, (1996) Ar nl 11) 235 EssolBHP vPionman (1985) 11 Arb tl 282 11.01 Estado Nacional Procuraién del Tesorodola 4.111 Necin el Camara de Comercio itemacionl, 3 Ay 2007 8:17 July 2008 (nc pubished) tty! Cop vCanaa, (1998) 28 LM 708 am Eureko BV Republic of Pola, HC 98 (2005), 12 8.89, 8.112 ICSID Reports 385Fedax NV vBalrian Republic of Venezuela, 825, 8.112 ICSID Case No ARB 96/3, C 101 (1997), 5CS1D Repots 188 FIOIC contract ease 157-160 romans Furd Insurance Company United 8.89, Mexican States, ICSID Case No ARB(AFYO201, WC 231 (208) Fougeralle SA (France) vNinisty of Defence ofthe 11.67 Syrian Arab Raps (1990) XV Yok Come Arb 515 Gam fmestments ne v Lived Mexican States, HC 8.100, $100 (2008), (2005) 44 LM 45 Ganz v Société Nationale de Chemins do Fer 1043, Turisions (SNOET), (1891) Rowe de fAtitrage 478 Gas Natural SDG SA v Argentine Republic, SID. 8.39 Case No ARB 03/10, IC T15 (2005) Generation Ukraine Inc VUsraine,ICSID Case No 8:36 AREVOOIS, HC 116 2003), 44 LM 404 (2008) Geneva Cou do ston decision of 11 December 11.108, 1987 (1888) 200 Yok Comm Ab 764 Garman Federal Supreme Court decision (1987) 11.112 Yok Comm Azo 489 Germany vUnied States of America (2001) CJ 5.27 466 Groonpeace arbitration 248 Ggniee HRA Europe (2001) Rowe de tAtitrage 10.49, 12 Halogeland Court of Appeal (Norway), Decision of 2:20 ‘16 August 1998, (2002) 24 YEk Comm Ab 519 Hamburg Court of Appeal decision of 30 July 1988, 11.77 (2000) 987 Yok Comm Ab 714 Hamburg reciaal cout dacsion of 18 September 11.77 1987, (2000) X8V Yok Comm Arb 710 Hey Metal decision 11.116 Himarton Lid vOmnium de Teaterert ot do 10.03, 1.92, \Valotsaion (OTV) (1884) Rowe de FAritrage 27, 11.95, 11.157 (1985) 9 Yex Comm Av 663, (1997) Rewe de Tasttrage 76, (1997) 204 Yok Come Arb 686 Himpua Calforia Energy Lid vPT (Parser) 2199, 3.88 Perusahaan Listnak Negara (Republic of Indonesia) 4146, 7.53 (2000) 987 Vek Comm Ab 11 76, 8118, 969,972 Hotzmann, Judge, opinion of rarian Assets 9.97 Ligation Reprter 10880, 8 ran-US CTR 323 HSN Capital LLC (US) vProductora y 188 Comercaizader do Tleusion SA. de CV (Maxico) (2007) 20041 Ybk Comm Ao 774 Huo v WAPOA (2000) 16 A Int 49 5.128 Hussein Nuaman Soufaki vUnited Arab Emirates 8.18 (Soufak case), ICSID Case No ARBIOQ7, IC 131 (2008) 0c 1110/1969, (1994) 10 Abie 277 2195-2197 100 2808/1977, (1977) 2 Yok Comm Afb 153.254 10C 2281198", (1982) 108 Jdu Dot inl $90.25 10C 3389, (1962) Vi Yok Comm Ab 119, 4.166 100 374211989, (1984) 111 Jdu Dot ul 910.25 OC 450019851986, (1986) 113.5 rat nt 2.44 118 10C 497211989, (1990) 118 Ju Deot al 1100 2.44 10C 573011988, (1990) 117 Ju Deol 1029 2.44 IOC Case No 10211 6206-6269 ICC Case No 11681 731 CC Case No $846, (1991) XVI Yok Comm Ab 87 9.45 Inoeysa Valisaletana The Republe of 324 Shader, ICSID Case No ARE/O428, IC 134 (2008) lnckan Organi Chemical Lid v Subsidy 1 (US) 11.49-11.50 Subsidiary 2(US) and Chomtx Fibres nc (Parent CCompary) (US) (1979) IV Yok Comm Ab 274 Industie Techntiga DerOxto SpA (tay) VPS 11.75, Prot | Eptopar Kereskedolmi SS Szogatato KFT (Hungary) (2007) 204 Yk Corn Ab 408 IrtecAra Inestment Guarantee vBangue Arabe et 11.68, Intemationae dimestsserent (1986) Xa Yok (Comm Ao 289Intemstional Standard Bloctonie Cop (US)v_— 11.96, Brdas Sociedad Anonima Petrclena (Argentina) (1962) Vi Yok Comm Arb 639 Irtemtional Tundertird Gaming Corporation v 868, 8.70, United Mexican States, AC 136 (2008) loan Mula Vierel Mica and ethers vRomeia, 8.18, ICSIO Case No ARBIO5/20, iC 339 (2008) ran Alera ind v Aveo Corp, $80 F 2d 141 (2nd Cir 10.84, 11.73, 1982}, (1998) XVI Yb Comm A $88 Irland v United Kingdom (Max Plant) PCA 4.18 ativation Naan court decision (1988) VI Yb Comm Arb 11.79 386 Jennings, Sir Robert, decision of 7 May 2001, 9.163 Veale it Ab Rep (May 2001) Jani Prodncil Metal and Minerals Import and 2.18 Expat Corporation vSulanser Co Lid (1996), ADL 249 it Venture Yasar and Brida SAPIC y 24 ‘Goverment of Tikmonstan, IOC Case No 9151, lets Avr, 8 June 1888 Joy Miniog Machinery Limited v Arab Republic of 8.28, 8.112 Egypt, ICSID Case No ARBIOQ/, IC 147 (2008) Karaha Bodas Compary LLC vPeruschaan 8118, Petambangan Minjak Gan Gasi Suri Near, ‘ard of 18 December 2000, text a Hntp vw karaabods, com egal Final, arisrube Coust of Appeal decision of 14 10.82 ‘September 2001 Kit Stoo Crano Lis vKone Copporation, 87 223-2.24 DLR 4th 128, (1894) 2 YEk Comm Ab 346 Klockner ndustriesAriagen GmbH United 3.143, 10.14 Republic of Camaroon and Société Camerounaise {do Engrs, ICSID Case No. ARBIBt/2, 111 Ju Drat it 409, 14 Jd ost it 163 Korsnas Marma vDunare-Auzias [1989] Rowe do. 245 Iastitrage 687 Kroinder vkraitz (1997) 4 ASA Bulan eas KSAG VOC SA (1905) Yok Comm Ab 762 11.111 Lagrand case (C1 Case) 527 Lama Vegypary Gepgyar (Hungary) st 1158 Camporaczio inant (aly), 1999) 0eVa Yo. Comm Aro 699 Lanco intemationa nc v Argentine Repub, IOSID 827, 8.40, Case No ARBISTIG, IC 148 (1998), 40 La 457 (2001) Landgeicht Hamburg (1979) IV Yok Comm Ab 2:24 281 Lauder see Ronald S Lauder v The Czech Republic Lena Gal ees aatration| 4146 LLESI SpA ot ASTALDI SpA vPoopl's Democratic: 8.32 Republic of Alga, ICSID Case No ARBIOSA3, IC ‘354 (2008) Leteo vLiberia 5.121 LG&E Energy Cop, LG & € Capita Cop and LG 852, 8.61, AE ktematora ie vArgentine Republic, ICSID. 864, 8.76, Case No ARBIO2/1, IC 152 (2008), IC 295 (2007) 83, 8.84 8.9, 9.80 Liamco see Libyan American Ol Company (Lance) Libyan American Ol Company (amo) v Socialist 1.155, 3.118 Peoples Libyan Arab Yaratirya fomedy Libyan 3.145, 3.147, ‘Arab Republic (1961) 20 LM 1, (1961) Yok Comm 6.116, 6.234, ‘Atb 89, (1982) VII Yb Comm Arb 382, (1982) 62.11.77, 11.136, LER 440, (1982) 17 LM 14 10199 Loowen Group Inc and Raymond L Loewen v — 2:168-2.169, United States of America, ICSID Case No 66, &7, ARBIAFY98, IC 253 (2001), NC 254 2009) 428.78 ILM811 (2003), 7ICSID Rep 425, 128 LR 339 LY Finance Group Limited vIPOC Intemational 10.70, Grouth Fund Limted (Bermuda), Suiss Federal Tribunal ist Diy 4P.102 (2008) afar case see Emilio Agustin Mafeziniv Kingdom of Span Malaysian Histrical Sahors SDN BHD vMalaysia, 8:32 ICSID Case No AFBIOG/10, C372 (2008)Marketing Displays Ifertional le VVRVan 11.119 Rate Reclame BV, Dutch Court of Appeal, The Hague decision of 24 Merch 2005 Manin Feldman v Mexico, ARBVAFY9A/1, C188 9.206, (2008), IGSID Review 2005 Vol 18 Matermaco SA v(1) PPM Cranes ne 2) Legis 3.22 Irises Si (2000) XY Comm Ab Meteciad Corporation v Urited Mexican States, 2.167, 2169, ICSID Case No ARBIAF)7/1, HC 161 (2000), 40 82, 8.116, 1L38 e001) a7, 0123 Metapar SA and Buen Ae SAV Argentina 8.106, Republi, ICSI Case No ARBIOM/, IC 325 (2008) Methanex Corporation v United States of America, 8.93 1 167 (2006) Mexico VUSA (Cross-Border Trucking) NAFTA 4.18, axbivaion UISA9E 2009-01, 6 Febery 2001 Middle East Cement Shipeing and Handing G SA v9.80 ‘Arab Republic f Egy, IGSID Case No ARBY 86, 1 168 (2002) Mbaly Intemational Corporation vRepuibic of SA 8.29 Lanka, ICSID Case No ARBVO02, IC 170 (2002), (2002) ICSID RevewForaignInestmet Law exenal 142 MINE vGuinea,41CSID Rep 85,22 December 10.12 1989 Minmetals Germany vFerco Stoo (1699) XV Yok 11.74 (Comm Aa 739 Misoroccti vAgnesi, Cte d Cassazione, 13 Dec 2.15, 4971, No 3620, (1976) Yok Comm Ab 190, Mors/Labinal case [1993] Rewo de Airane GAS. 2.121 Mos Plert see land v United Kingdom (Mex 4.18, Plant) Ms Emja Braack Shifts KG vWarsild Diesel 2.48, AB (1988) Rowe de TArtitrage 431 MID Equty Sdn Bhd & MTD Chie vRapubtc of 854, 8.61, Chile, ICSID Case No ARBVON/T, IC 174 2004), 13 B64, 8.123 ICSIG Repets 500 Mustar Leasing Ud vTwinstar Leasing Lid, US 2.24 District Court, Easiom Distt of Lousiana, 28 ‘August 1998, Cl Action Case No 98-1338; 2000) 208 Yok Camm Ab 671 Naico, Paris Cour dAppel, 22 January 2008 2.164 National Eectiity Company AD (Bulgaia)v 11.64 ECONBERG Lid (Creat), (2000) XV Yo Comm Ae 678 National Grid Group ple vArgontine Repebiie, 4.91, 4.111, ICSID Case; LIA Case No UN7S49, IC 261 (2008) 4.128, 7.61 a7 Nopan Steal Cop vCuitett Coal Ld [198090] 4 4.63, OGLTR 105 Noble Venuzes vRomaria a2 Nokia Maller SA v Masser, 04 Ybk Corrm Arb 2.169, (681, ASA Buln (1885) No 1, 4 Nosolor case (1985) Dalla 103 11154-11185 Nykomb Synergetics Technology Holding AB v 878 Lata, IC 182 (2008), 11 ICSID Reports 158 (© Limited (Hong Kong) vS GmbH (Austia) 2007) 11.69 20M Yok Camm Ab 258 (Occidental Petroleum Corporation and Occidental 628, 8.65, Exportion ad Production Company vRepublc of 9.58, Ecuadbr, ICSID Case No AREY O61, C305 (2007) (Cnex Carp vBall Cop (1996) Ativan and 264 Dispute Resolution Law Jour 193, (195) XX be Comm Arb 275 Pan American Energy vAgentina aa Paris Lapeyre vSauxege (2001) Rewe de 10.39 Iasttrage 806 Parker (1826) 4 Rep ntl Arb Awards 29 670 Parkerings-Compagriet vRepubic of Lithuania, 864, 8.65, ICSID Case No ARB O5'8 8.88, 8100 Patick Michell yDemocratic Republic ofthe 8.2, 1012 (Congo, ICSID Case No AREV8Q7, IC 172 (2006) Potro Lined vKyrayz Repub, SOC Case No 8.123, 112812008, HC 184 (2005)PPholpe Dodge Cop viran (1986) 10 kan-US CTR 8.116, wat Prilipe Guin vMlaysia, IOSID Case No 8.24 ‘ARBI9Q3, IC 123 2000, 5ICSID Reports 492 Pope & Talbot ine vGovenmert of Canada, IC 192 868, 8.7, (2000), IC 193 (2007). 41 ILM 1347 (2002), 7 ICSID 882, 8.83, Reports 69 220 PPG Indust Inc vPikinglon Pic, 25 F Supp 946, 1043 465, (1996) 20¢Yk Comm Arb 885 PSEG Gobal nc and Konya Ingn Elect Uretim 865, 8.83, ve Tiare Limited Set v Repu of Trkey, ICSID Case No ARIOQ!S, IC 98 (2007) Publicis Communications and Publicis SA vTaw 9:16-9:17 Noth Communications in (2000) XV Yk Comm Ato 152 Putraball coo Societe PT Putrabali Adyamia Pyramids aitration| 9.143, 1.78 RSA VA Ltd (2001) 9/1 Yok Comm Ab 863. 11.84 Radio Corpcration of Ametica vChina (1941) 8 LR 1.197 8 Renusagar Power Co Lid vGeneral Electic Co 11.56, 1.407, (1985) 9 Yk Comm A 681 11110 Resort Candesiniums kre val (1995) XXYOK 7.20, Comm Ara 628 RM Investment Trading Co Pat Lid (na) b Bosing 11.51 Compary Rocco Gusoppe @ Flv Federal Commerce and 2.60 "Nadgation Lid (1985) 10 Yek Comm Arb 464 Rompetrl Group NV vRomaria, ICSID Case No 8.22 ARBIOB3, IC 322 2008) Ronald § Lauder vTho Czech Republic, C205 824, 8.58, (2001) Bat mal Telekom AS and Tels Mobi an Telokomurikasyon Hizmatie AS v Republic of Kazakhstan, ICSID Case No ARBIOS/16, IC 344 (2008) SDMyars ic vGovemmmont of Canada, 13 une 8.68, 8.123, 2000, I 249 (2000), HC 250 2002), 40 LM 1408 9.80 (2001) ‘SA Compare Commercial Anké vSA Tadigrain 11.117 France (2001) Rewe de fAtitago 773 SA Leboratores Euesilcone vSocité Bez 11.113, Medizntectnk GmbH (2004) Rewue de titrane 1s Saluka imestments BV vGzech Republic, IC 210 821, 8.61, (2006) 864 868, 871,874 878 807, B124 ‘Santa Elena see Compafia del Desarllo do Santa Elena SA Sapphice arbitration 1.485, 3153- 3.185, 2218 ‘Saud Arabia vArablan American Ol Company 3198, 9.56, (@vamco) (1963) 27 LR 117 902 ‘Sedco inc vNaional Karian Ql Co, Case No 129, 4.143, Branus CR ‘SEEE vYugoseda (1985) Rowe doaritrage 11.154 116, (1985) 25 LM 345 Sempra Energy vRepublic of Argenta, SID 3.143, 4.91 Case No, ARBIO2/16, IC 304 (2007) ss, as, 8.83, 8124 SGS Société Génviale de Sunellance SAv 8.58, 8.109 Isiamic Republic ofPakistan, ICSD CaseNo 8.110, 8112 ARBIOAI3, IC 223 (200), 42 LM 1280 (2003) SGS Société Génviale de Sunellance SAv 858, 6.111, Republic ofthe Phiippnes,ICSID Caso No 112 ARBIOQI6, IC 224 (2004) Slemens AG vArgotine Repubic, ICSID Case No 856, 8.74, ARBIO2I, IC 227 (2007) 8a, a7, B17, 980 ‘SNE v Chamie de Commerce Intemationle, Cour S61 ‘dAppal de Pats, tere Chambre, section C, 22 enuary 2008, SNE vOytecIndusvies BV, Cour de Cassation 11.119 decision of June 2008 Atel No 680)Sociedad Animina Eduardo Viera vRepuie of 8.14 Chile, ICSID Case No AREVO4/, IC 301 (2007) Soci Alatl Business Systems ot Alcatel 246, 2.48, Mico electronics cv and others, Bull Cv n 12; Din 3 daly 2007, comm 18 Soci Anonyme see SA ‘Sool Cutic Défense Systm vChamre de $61, 5.63, Commerce itemationae, (1957) Rowe do Ey rastitrage 417 Société dimestissoment Kal (Tunisia) vTaieb 11.62 Hadid (Tunisia) and Hans Bart (1898) 24 Yok Comm Aro 770 Soci Dow Chemical France et al vSocidké 1.108, 242 Isover Saint Gan (France) (1863) 110 Jd Droit In 899, (1984) DCYoK Comm Ab 131 ‘Socité Empresa do Telecomuricacines de Cuba § 89 SSA (ETECSA)vTelfoica Artilara SA and SNC Banco Nacional de Comercio Exterior, Cue lan Rede > J. Neri Hunter > Nigallackaby > Constantine Parasides ‘Source > Listof Abbreviations in ‘Alan Recern Men Hunter etal, Reem ‘and Huron International tiation, ‘th (ONigel Backaby, Nesan Hunter, Constantine Parasides ‘Alan Recor: or‘Am Rovin| American Review of emational Abtraton, UnversityPrass 2000) no published by us| ppt ‘Ato intl Acbatlon lntematinal, published bythe LOW ALR Atbiallon Law Reports, published by the NADR ARS Aida Reinsurance and insurance Arbitration Soca Mount Vern NY (Established 1994) Aa ‘Atco ASA Assocation Suisse de rAvtitrage/ Swiss Abitration ‘Association, Basal (Established 1874) ‘ASABul Bulan ofthe Swiss Arbitration Association, published by Kluwer Law tomational ASEAN Assocation of Southeast Asian Nations, Bangkok (Established 1967) ‘Asian il Asian letematlona Abitatlon Journal, pulsed by fo) Kluwer Law interationl B Vet GE Entscheidungon des Bundesterassungsgerchs, published by Mohr Siebeck BGHZ —_Entschaidungon des Burndesomichtshotes in ‘Zulsachen, published by Cal Heymanrs Verlag Bing —_—_—Bingharris Common Pleas Reports (Published in Engish Repots) ers Bilateral imastment treaties BR Bankruptey Reporter (US), published by West Publishing Brussels Brussels Coreriion on Juisction and the CComention Enforcement of dadgmerts in Gl and Commercial Maters 1968 Brussels Council Reulalon (EC) No 4/200" on Jurisciction Regulation andthe Erercament of Judgments in Ci and Commercial dispeses BYL Bish Yearbeck of ftematonal Law, pabished by Oxford Uniersty Press ca, CCout of Appeal ca Calera CANACO Camara Naclenal de Comercio de a Cue de México, Mexico City (Established 1874) CAS Cour of Attaten for Sport (Cass Clv Gourde Cassation (French Cull Chamber) COBE ——_Cancall des Bareaux do la Communautb Européene ca Chamber of commerce ai indsty CEDR Contre fr Etfective Dispute Resolution, London (Established 1980) on Chapter CIETAC China rtemalonal Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission, Bejing (Established 1956) CIETAC —CIETAC Attration Rules, October 1995 eon Rules Ge (out (US Federal) CMEA Council for Mutual Econamic Assistance (Camecen), ‘seated 1901 COGSA —_Cariage of Goods by Saa Act (US) Consenatory Consenatory Proisional Measizs in rtertionl Measures. Abivation, Sth Joint Colloque 1993, published by lec CPR Contr for Public Resources, Now York DAC Report Departmental Adsry Rept on the Made! Law DoF Discourted cash fow analysis anaysis, Davo Commission on Itemationsl Artivation. Fra! Report Repot on Mul-Paty Arbivaions, Pars, Juno 1994, published by JOC DIAC Dial Itematloel Attvaion Canto Ds. DDoutscho Institution fir Scheidsgarcttsbarkoll German Instittion of Abirtion, Cologne Disp Res J Dispute Resolution Jounal, published by the AAA DLR. Dominion Law Repos, pubished by Canada Law Book Nu District Court of New Jersey DRCAFTA Domirican Republic Corral American-United States Free Trade Ageemant, signed 5 August 2004 bs. Recueil Dalz ot Sirey, published by Edtions Dalaz ECHR Camantion fr the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (European Convention on Human Rights). signed 4 November 1250EC Europecn Court of Justice, Luxemboug (Estabiished 1952) ECOSOC United Nations Economie and Serial Coun EOR European Cout Repats ECT Energy Charter Treaty 1994 ED. lecrorc data inerchange ey Eaton esi lecroicaly stored information European European Corertion on nterational Cormmarcial Cometion Abivation, signed 24 Api 1961 of 1961 EWCA out of Appeal (England and Wales) FF 24, F 2d Federal Reporter (US) 1st, 2nd ane i series, published by West Pubishing FIA Formula One Association FAR Faderal Atitation Act 1925 (US) FCA Faderal Cut of Australia| FON Treaty Friendship, Commerce and Nadgaton Treaty Fed Appx Federal Appendix, publisher by West Pushing FIOIC Fédération itemetionle des ingiveurs- consis! Intemational Federation of Consulting Engineers, Geneva (Established 1913) Final Report Final Report ofthe Werking Group onthe IOC ICC Clause Standart Aitation Clause, document 420/318, 24 (ctaber 1091 FOSFA —Faderation of Ol, Soods and Fats, London (Established 1971) FRO Federal Rues Decisions, published by West Publishing FTA Free Tade Agreement GAFTA Grain and Feed Trade Association, London (Established 1878) Genera —_Gemia Cernetion fr the Execution of Foreign Cometion Abial Anas, signed 28 September 1827 Genes Goma Protocol of 1823, signed 24 Soptomber 1923 Protocol Hague Hague Convention forthe Pace Settement of Convention temational Disputes 199 Hague Hague Conertion forthe Pace Setlement of Convention tematonal Disputes 1907 Hogue Hague Convarton an Choice of Court Agrwerents, Comenion signed 30 line 2005, 2005 Hav Rev Haver Law Rew, published by the Henerd Law Rasiaw Association Hastings ln Hastings Intemational and Comparative Law Rien, Comp Rev published by Hastings Callege ofthe Law, University ‘et Caliomia Heidelberg Heidelbarg Report on the Aplcation ofthe Brussels Repot Regulation 44/2001, published by the European Commission, 2005 Holocaust Gime Resdlution Tabunal fr Dormant Accounts in Tribunals Saitzedand ACAC Inter-American Comention against Corupton signed 20 Merch 1996, ATA rteratona i Trafle Association A Irterstional Bar Association, London (Established 1947) IBA Rules IBA Rules on the Taking of Eidence in irtemaional Commercial Ativation, adopted 1 June 1968 ec Intemational Chamber of Commerce, Paris (Established 199) 1oC-Caut tematonal Gout of tition of the OC, Paris (Established 1823) ICCRues IOC Rules of Atitation, 1 January 2008 edtion ICCA tematonal Counc for Commercial Atatration ICDR ternational Gari for Dispute Resoliion (Established by the AAA) ICOR Rules ICDR Irteational Dispute Resolution Procedures, 1 ‘ae 2008 eatenie Irtemational Cou of Justice, The Hague (Established 1948) ILO rferatona and Comparative Law Quarter, ubiished by Cambxidge University Press ICSI tematonal Gate fo the Setlemart of inestment Disputes, Washington OC Established 1985) ICSID Rules. ICSID Rules of Procedure fer Atitration Proceedings, 2008 eaten IELTR Intemational Energy Law and Taxation Renew, published by Sevot and Maxwell ie Irtemetlonl Review of kxellectual Property and Competition Law, published by Max Panck institute fer ktellectual Property, Competition and Tax Law uw Intemational Legal Materials, pushed by American Society of ntrational Law Lo Irterstional Labour Organization, Geneva (Estabiched 1919) LR rteratonal Law Reports, published by Cambridge Unversity Press Ne Irteretional Monetary Fund INCOTERMS htemational Rules fr the Iteration of Tad Toms IL ALR—eteratonal Atitration Law Rew, published by Sweet & Maxell ea Intemational Construction Law Redew, published by Construction ifrna Lev lranUS CTR fanUS Claims Tibunal Raper, published by Gris TTA Institut for Tansnational Atsivation, Piano TX (Established 1986) Js Dat tl Journal du Ort temational (Clune, published by neCiasseur “Jit Are Journal of atematonal Acbiration, pushed by iKuwer ay Treaty General Treaty of Friendship, Commerce and Nagatin, 1794 aL Joumal of Business Law, published by Sweet and Maxval CAA Lapese Commercial Atitraton Association 2 uma of Dispute Resclution, published by University ‘er Missouri Schoo of Law LEd Usted States Supreme Cout Reports, Lawyers! Eatin, publishod by LexisNexis Lando Principles of European Contract Law (Lando Principles Principes’) LOA ——_Lerdon Court of tematona Abitaton, London (Established 1892) LOIA Rues CIA Abitvation Rules, 1 January 1998 edton LETCO Liberian Eastem Tinbor Company LNG Ligifled natural gas LOR Law Quexterty Roiow, published by Sweet & Maxwell [MO Tern US Disrct Curt forthe Middle Distt of Ternessee Mediate MedtionAitration [MERCOSUR Mercado Canin del Su, established 1991 MEN Clause Most fcxred nation clause Model Law Mode! Law on Intemetional Crmmercial Atrio, opted 21 June 1965 Montevideo Treaty concern the Union of Sauth American Comention States in respect of Procedural Law, signed 11 nua 1889) Mosca Canvantion on the Settlement of Arbitration of Cl Comrtion Law Disputes Arising fom Raatons of Econom, 1972 _Scienlife and Technical Cooperation, signed May on. NAC Nealon Abitation Awerds NADR Nationale Academy for Dispute Resolution NAFTA Nath American Free Trade Agoament, signed 17, December 1992 NAL NetberendsArbivation Fsttute NCAgp Nath Carina Court of Appeals Repats NE North Eastem Reporter, published by West Publishing,New York Comention NSWLR NYLSchJ Int Comp L Big 8 GRESGT Bg g52 f pos Rvd Dir CComention on the Recognition and Enfrcemert of Foreign Avital Avards, signed 10 June 1958 Nove Auistische Wochanschit, published by CH Beck Veriag Naw South Wales Law Reperts Norsk Tidsskr for nterational Ret Nove Juma of rtemational Law, published by Martinus Nite Noth Wester Repater, published by West Publishing Now York Repats, published by West Pushing Now York Law Scheel Jour of temetional ane (Comparative Law, published by New York Law School "Now York Law Jounal, pushed by the Journal "Now York Supplement, published by West Publishing Cranisatlon fo Econorric Co-eperation and Dovelopmert, Paris (Established 1961) i Gas Energy Mining bastructure Dispute Maragoment eral ist i and Gas Law and Taxation Relew, published by Sweet and Maal IrtecAmerican Comention en btematinal Commercial Ativan, signed 30 January 1975 Paragraph Permanent Cout of Atitraton, The Hague Permanent Cout of btmational sic, succeeded bys Law Reports, Queers Bench, published by the Irecoporated Counc of Law Reperting fx England and Wales Rue Rovisions tothe Model Law, adopted Docorber 2006 Racketeer hiluenced and Compt Organizations Act (us) Fivsta dito ktemazionale Prato © Processuale, Intemaz, Pv published by CEDAM Proc Rome Comtion 1920 sa ‘SBAND soc SOC Rules socaM sD SDNY Sedona Principles Siac SIR Strasbourg Unter Law Swiss PL Swiss Rules Tex tL UOC Rep pee unec Rome Comention an the Law Apticable to CConractual Obligations Section ‘Supreme Court Repter, published by West Publishing Stockhclm Chamber of Commerce ‘Stocktcim Chamber of Commerce Abiration Rules, ‘st danuary 2007 edition ‘Sniss Chambers’ Cout of Abitaon and Maton Southam Distt Southam Distt of New York (US District Court) Best Practices fr Electronic Document Retertion and Production ‘Singapore Intemational Atitration Contre (Established 1991), ‘Singapore Law Repats, published by Justis Publishing European Conerton proving a Ufo Law on Astivalion, signed 20 Janus 1988 ‘Snise Pte Intemational Law Act 1987, Chapter 12 ‘Srise Res of ltematlera Abitatien, adopted rua 2006 Tecnology and Construction Cost English) Texar Intemational Law Jour, pushed by Unversity of Toxas Schaaf Law Unter Arbitration Act (US) Unter Commercial Cade Repating Senice (US), published by West Publishing Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Paley United Nations Compensation Comission, established 1990,UNCITRAL Urited Nations Camerission on teratonal Tad Law, Vienna (Established 1896) UNCITRAL Soe Model Lav, Revised Model Law Model Law UNOITRAL Notes on Organizing Atitral Proceedings UNCITRAL —UNCITRAL Atitvation Rules, adopted 15 December Ries 1978 UNCTAD United Nations Canfernce an Trade and UNDROIT —Dasopment, Gono (Established 1964) UNDROT Principles. Principles of rtemational Commercial LawCortrats, Résad Api 2004 edition us. United States Supreme Court Repos, pubiished by LexisNexis ‘Vienna United Nations Conertion on Contract forthe Sales emational Sale of Goods 1980, Comention VuTL Vanderbilt Jour of Transnational Law, published by Vanderbilt Unversity Law Schoo Washington Washing Convention onthe Setlement of Comerion imestment Disputes between States and Nationals of Cther States, signed 18 March 1965 WIPO World ulectual Propaty Organisation, Gana (Established 1967) WIPO Rules WIPO Abitration Rules WLR Wookly Law Roports ‘Ward Ato & World Acbtatlon and Mediation Reve, plished by Med Rev axis "Werld Cou’ Soe IC YBCA Yok Yearbook of Career Abitation, published by Con GCA ECA ZO Ahiazessochung (Geman code oil roca) BR pogo 20 KluwerArbitration — @ wotterskiuner| Kluwer Law Intemational 1. An Overview of International Arbitration ‘an Reon: J Manin Harter, Nel Backaby; Constatne Author Parasies, > Aan edie > nen Murer 4 Introduction > Conta Press a. What is arbitration? Somme an Owniow of 4.01 Intemational aitation has become the principal method of __nferational Atitration resolung disputes between States, inchs, and corporations inn an Rediem J almost every aspect of intmationgl rade, commerce, ard Nestn Hunter, etl imestmert. The established centres of artvaten report increasing Resta and Hunter on ‘actly, year on year, new atitration cetres have been setup to _Inismational bio, Catch this wae of new business; States have modemised thot ws (Nigel Blackaby, ‘S02 to bo seen to bo ‘abiation fend’ fs of lauyers and Nese Hunt, ‘accountants have eetalshed dedicated grape of aitration CConstanine Partasies, ‘Specialists; conferences and seminars pcre; and the dstincthe Aan Rec, Odor law ard practice of ntematinal arbitration has became a subject fr Unversy Prose 2008) study in universes ard law schodls alike pp.1-83 1.02. Amidst al tis actly, it would be easy to forget that, nts ‘ign, the concept of aration isa simple ane. Patias who are in dispute are to submit thar dsacreomert to a person whose ‘expertise or judgment they ust Tey each put that respective ‘cases to ths person—ths priate india, this arbtraor—ho [eag0 7" ste, considers the facts ad the arguments, an then makes a decsion. That decision is fral and binding onthe pales: and its binding because the parties have ayeed that it ‘had be, rater than because ofthe coercive power of ary State. ‘Attain, in shot, isan effective vay of obtaining final and, binding decision ona dispute or series of disputes, without reference toa caut oflaw. 4103. tis easy to see haw such a basically simple, iefornal, and essentially private system of dispute resto came tobe atopted by allocative cr communty—cr even by a group cf traders, dealers, cr merchants within a partieiar area or market. Whit isethan mare dif to understands how such an elementary ‘system came to be accoped—and accepted not marly in a local ‘rnatona setting, but wordvide (not merely by induidvas, but by ‘oiermerts and raercorperatons) as the established mathod cf fesoling disputes in which milins or even huncreds of milion of dolars ae al stake, Nevertheless, this Is what has happened ar the way in which thas happened is one ofthe major theres of this book 1b The conduct ofan arbitration 1.04 There's a deceptive simplicity about the way in wich attra proceedings ae conducted. They tke place in mary diferent Counties, with partes, counsel, and arbiratrs of mary dierent nationalities who mix together fooly cing breaks inthe meetings forthe hearings. Thre isa sttking lack of malty. An aration is not ke proceedings in a cout of law. There ae no ushers, wigs, or ‘gowns; no judge or judges siting in solemn robes upon a dais; no Mallon fags, orbs, or Sceptes. Theos simply a group cf peorte ‘Seated arourd ar of tables, ina room ied fe he occasion. Hit wer not for tho stacked plas oflove-arch fs, the iw books, and ‘the transept wiles wih tar microphones and stenctype mactines, it might look to an outsidr as if conference or a business meeting was in prgess. It woud rot look like a legal proceoding at al 4105 In oc, the appearance conceals the realy. ls tue thatthe partes themsehes choose fo arbtvate, as an alemative to ligation ‘rather methods of dspute rescuton Is tte oo tha, toa large fetent, the aritrates and the parties may choose for themselves the procedures 1o be flowed. thay want a fast-track’ arbitration”) they tay axe one (although itis to take place under the Sviss Rules of ftemationa Attract willbe known by the somewhat more done tile fan ‘Expedited Procedure). the parties want todispanse wth the [9 pago 2° dscosure of documents or the ‘eidence of witnesses, they may do So. Indeed, they may even sponse with th hearing ite they wish. 44.06. night soem a i patios and arbitatrs int their oun priate universe; but in elt the practice of resching disputes by intemetional aatation oly works eflectivly because it isha a place by a complex system of rational ane and interational ‘wales. Even a comparatively simple intemtionlatitaton may ‘eauire reference toa east fur diferent nallonal systems oF Ales ‘flaw! which in tum may be derived fr an inteational treaty or ‘corertion—or indeed, fam the UNCITRAL Model La on interetional rtitraton, which is refered to later inthis chapter. First, thor isthe law that gowns the interior ecogeiton ard cenfercoment ofthe agreement to abate. Thon there i the aw the socalled lex abitf—that qos, or regulates, the actual ation proceedings themsehes. Naxt—and generally mest importarty—there isthe aw or the set of les that the arbitra ‘buna is required to apply tothe substantive matters in dspute- Finally, thar isthe kaw that gosems the Intemational recognition ‘and erforcemert ofthe avers ofthe ata tbunal 41.07 These avs may wel bo te same. The fx arity, which orm the arbitral procaodinasthamslies, and weich wl most ‘alvays be the rior ia of the pace of bration may aso ‘oem the substantive matters in issue. But this is not necessary ‘0. The law that govems the substantive matters in issue (and which ‘ee by a verily frames, including the applicable la, "the {ovoring law, on England ‘the proper lw) may be a cerent ‘system of law altogether. Far example, anata buna siting in Switzetand, govemed (or regulated) by Swiss law a the law ofthe place of arbitration, may wall be requied to apply the Law of New ‘York as the apticable or subetanthe aw of the contract.) [2 9209 “5 Moreoser, this applicable or substanthe aw wil nt necessarily be a partcular rational system of law. It may be pubic intrtional lay, or bln of national award pubic irtemational aw, oF even an assamblane of rules known as ltematona ade lad transnational law, the modem law merchant (the so-alad lox _mercatora), or some other i.” Finally, because most interetional atrations take place in a retral'courty—that is 10 ‘say, a county wich isnot the county ofthe parties—the system {llaw which governs the ntemetionl recognition and enforcement of the avard ofthe attra tibural wl almost alvays be diferent fom that which gov tho arial proceedings themsves. This ‘dependence of the interior commercial arta process Wxon diferent, and occasionally canficting, ules of national and intertionl law is ancther ofthe majo theres ofthis book A brief historical note41.08 Theres as yet no goneral history of arbitatlon. nod, wltng such a story woud be lke tying fo pu together an immense jigsaw puzzle, vith many ofthe pieces missing and lost foresee Ono problem forthe vould historian is that cf language. A ‘general stay would need took at the deelopment of aration ‘across the gabe, a well as across the ages! Anata problem is that of sources." try general history woud inal a round the- word tour ofibraries and unkersities, cout texts, and historical records; and this wold be no easy tsk since, as a mathod of resoling disputes, abitralon in one farm or aah has been in ‘existence fr thousands of year") Bopage 24° 41.09. Avtitraton has been described as an ‘apparently rudimentary method of setting disputes, since it consists of submiting them to ‘rcnary ind\ouals whose cry qualification i that of being chosen by the parties” Is no cut to suai the ‘rumen nature ofthe abil process in is early days. Two merchants, in dispute cr tho price o qualy of goods dalered, woud tun toa third, whem they knew and usted fora decision on that dspute ad would arb to abido by that decision without futher question; or ‘wo trades, arguing ovr equipment that one claimed to be defective, oud agree to sete the dspute by accepting the Juckgnent of a flow dealer. And they woud do this, nt because of ‘any legal Sanction, bt because ths was whit was expocted of ‘them inthe community win weich they camed on thar business it can be said vith some conidence that the pute rescltlen machanisme ofthe post-classical ‘mercantile wold were canducte with, and crew tele Stenglhs fom, cammmunties consisting aithor of particpant in an inci trade or of persons frrolled in bodes established unde the auspices and conta of geographical trading contes. Such ‘communities gave bith othe Impl expectations ‘and poor group pressures which bth shaped and terorced the resolution of disputes by an impartial and (ten prestigious personage. Within Such ‘communities, extemal sanctions woud have been lerglyrecundart, even ia legal fareverk had boon axalate ob inom iro pay. wich inthe man it was no!) 4.40 Within local community, the authority ofthe ord ofthe maner in an English vllage, or ofa Shaikh in cne of th tenitres of ‘Arabia may well have bean suficint to ensure that the patios ‘accepted and cated aut the decisions that were made. Sima, win a particular trade cx market, a merchant's concom fr his reputation (othe isk of sanctions being imposed by Ns trade association)" woud usualy be suficent to ensure compliance. 4.41 Intheary, such a localised system of ate justice might have continued wht ay supersion o intention by the courts ‘flau—in much the same way 2, in gonera, the law does not ‘concem itself with supandsing cx enecing tho private las of member’ club, Reman lav in fact adept such an attitude of inaference to pate arbitration. An afitation agreement was pot Lunknaan andi was not log but either the atbtation agreement nor any award made [3} page “5° under it had any legal fect. To ‘oascame this problem, partes would make a double promise (a ‘campromissum sub poor). a promise to arbrate ad a promise topay a penalty if the arbitration agreament othe arbitral award \was not henoaed. The Reman cout would nt enforce the titration agreement or the avard, butt would enforce the promise topay the panty") 4.42. Is doubt whether any modem State could afr to stare back and awa system of priate ustice—depending essertialy ‘on the ntegrty of the abitrales ard tho good ofthe paxticiperts| tobe the only method of regulating commercial actives. ‘Acttration may well have been ‘a system of justice, bam of merchants" bu just as wari co important to boat to the ‘generals, ”/¢0arblalon Was too important tobe lf to privet prison, 4.43. National rogdation of tration came fst interetional aritraton doos not stay within national borders. On the ‘cortrary, lt rosses them agin aw again. A cerpration based in the United States might contract vith another corporation based in ‘Germany, forthe constuction of a power part in Egypt, wth an ‘agreement thal any dsputes should bo soled by arbitration in Londen. Howis such an arbitration agreement to be erforced, fa dispute isos and one of tho parties refuses to arbitrate? Which ‘court vl hae jurisdiction? i thee isan abivation which leads to an_avard of damages and costs, how that aver to be enforced ‘against the assets ofthe osing pty, ithe losing party reluses to ‘cary cut the awerd voluntary? And again, wich cout has Jurscction? 4.44 Is ent that the national aw of one State alone isnot adequate to deal with pecblems ofthis kind, since the juriscicton of ‘any Gen State is ganeraly limited to its oun teitery. What is heed is anintmatiena realy or corertion, 3} 20° inking {ogather national laws and proding, so far as possible, system of \wordvide enforcer, both of aratration agreements and of atta ‘avards, The treaies and comertons, and alhe major interetional intrumerts, vil be discussed in more deal toned the nd of ths chapter. For the presert, itis use simply to list them: they ae all significant landmarks inthe development ofa modes law and practice of irtematoral abtration—ard thoy are lancimarks to wich reference vil continual be made, {International rules treaties, and conventions 4.48. The most important landmarks aro: (1) The Ganeve Protocal of 1923 the 1923 Geneva Pretec). ) (2) The Geneva Comentin of 1907 (he 1927 Geneva Convention)" (0) The New Yak Comertion of 1958 (he New ark Convention)" (4) The UNOITRAL Arbitration Rules (the UNCITRAL Rules) adopted by resolution of the General Assemby ofthe United Non in December 1978." (6) The Washington Comention of 1865 (he Washington Convention} (6)"he UNCITRAL Model Law (he Model Law) adopted by the United Nations Cammission an ntaretionl Trade Law in June 198528) (7) Rasisions tothe Modal Law (the Revsed Model Law) adopted in December 2006.2") Bopape 7 Forth poser, tis sufcient simply to note the names of these Tendmaks'. Thay wil be considered in more deta later inthis chapter {8 The meaning of intemational’ |. International and domestic arbitrations contrasted 41.46. Tho tam inerationa!is used to mark th dfereneo batwoon trans wich re purl atonal rcemwstc ae those which ‘Sumo way anscond atonal boundaies ad soa inleratonl inthe terinceny adopted by tue Jessup, transnational.) 41.47 thas boon said that ery abivation is anion atitraton, in that it must beheld at agen place and is accordingly subject to ‘the national aw ofthat place. In a rac sense, this is correct. ‘an intemaionl arbitration is held in Brussels, the place cr'sea’ of the artivaton wl be Bruseels andthe tabuna'savard vl be a Belgian anerd, But in practice it's usial to dstngsh between atirations wbich ae purely rational or ‘domestic and those wich ‘ate rtemationa’. There are good legal and practical easons for this 41.48. Fist, tothe extent thatthe procedure in ay atitraton is regulated by la, tht law is roraly the law ofthe place of atitraton: thats to say, tho law ofthe sea’ ofthe aritraton. oan interetional aritraton (ike its national or ‘domestic’ counterpart), the parties usualy have no connection with the seat ofthe _atitaton. eed, tho seat il onary havo been chosen by the bates, or by an abit institution, precisely because its apace wth which the patios have no connection. wll be a tly neta ‘seat 41.49 Secondy, the partes to an irtematonal arbitration ae usually (Gut no aay) comporations, States, or State efile, whist the pales toa domestic atation will more usualy be private inc\duals. Ths mears that an element of consume protection wll almost cetanly form pat ofthe law govering domestic attains." page "8" 41.20. Ted, the sums imped in intemstiona arbitrations arostaly (but not aways) considerably «rear than those inved in domestic atitrations, which may—for example—concam a corrparaly tial dspute between a customer ar an agent over a faity motor car ora package holiday tha alled othe up to ts ‘dance publ 4.21. Tothese thre reasons might be added afouth, namay that in some States, the State tsll—r one ofits erties —is ony parmited to eniar into arttraton axgeoments in respect of trtemetional varsactins. 4.22 Gaenits importance, it might be thougt that there would be {general agreement onthe mearing of intemaiona rtitraon. But this is nat so. When l use a werd, said Hurpty Darety it meen Just what | choose i to mean-—neither mare nar less."=" In deference to this relaxed approach to language, the werd intematona has atleast tree leer cefitons when i cms to interstional artration. The frst depends onthe nature ofthe ispue. The second depends on the nationality of the partes. The thi apereach, whichis tat ofthe Medel Law, depends on the blending ofthe fist to, lus a reference tothe chosen pace of atiraton. This is sigicant, because the essential dference between domestic nd intematonal rbitalion vas recogresed inthe Model Law, wich is eyes) state to bea law designod or interetional commercial aftvation. Many States tane adopted a ‘Sopeate logal regime to goiem inematonal arbitrations taking place on thar terior, reoognising the diferent considerations that aprly to such arbitrations. These States include (out are not ited {a} Belgium, Braz, Colombia, France, Hang Kong, Singapore, and Swtzerand. The international nature of the dispute 4.24. The Intemational Chamber of Cornero (CC) established is Caut ofAcitration in Pais in 1923" to pedo fr the settlement by artitation of what are described as ‘business spits ofan intemetional character.” "The ICC wes quick to adopt the nature of the dispute as its citron for deciding whether or not an axitation ‘was an inematioreaialion undbr its res. Although a rst the ICC ery considered business tsps as ‘rteretional they imeled rationals of eliferent counties, it altered its ues in 1927 to cover asus tat [9 pace °° contained a foreign element even it the patie were nationals of he same county. Thre is ro dfrition| in the IOC Rules of what is maant by "business disputes ofan interstiona character’ but the explanatory booket issued by the IoC used to state: the itematonal ature ofthe aatration does not ‘ean that the parties must necessarly be fcferent rationales. By vtue ofits cbject, the cantract can evertholess extend beyond national borders, when for ‘@aample a contract is cancluted between tw rationals of the same State fr porerrence in anther country, or whan itis concluded betwoon a State anc a subsidiary ofa froign company cong business in that State“) 41.24 Tis wide interpretation of tho tem ‘intrtional is also to be {ouredin the French aw an interetinalzxttaion. By a Decree of 12 May 1981, a separate legal regime was created fr ‘interior ‘atitrations conducted in France. "The dalton gen inthe Deco isis sparse. Atle 1492 ofthe French Code of Cll Procedure simply froudes that ‘an attration i intetionl when it imales the interest of intemational rade using this language, the Code has adopted the dafirition gen by the highest French cout (the Cour de Cassatcn) in several previous decisions: Its goneralyrecogrised that tis definition covers the ‘movement of gos or money fom ane county to another, with sknficant regard being pit cher ‘ements suchas the natoralty of tho parties, the Face ofthe conclusion ofthe cartract et. Former French colonies, such as Oot athe Cate hoi and, toa lesser extent, Algo and Tunisia, also follow tis approach in ) page "41"4.119. Varies possitie ways of dealing withthe problem hae boon ‘carnassed, These inlude arelum to frst principles, whereby the attra trbural would ask, in respect ofeach partcwar arbitration, ‘Whats the best way of dealing vith tis case, stating fom ero and a proposal that the parties who pay fr the abitation| might be gien the opportunity to make an informed choice— naely, do they want a fulbHonn ta oftheir espe, whatowr Costs, cr, to sa time and money, woud they bo prepared to ‘accept some fam of shortened procedure, ecognising that ths ‘woud limt tei opportunity to develop their espoctve cases as maticdously as they might wish? This is an imrvtant ope; ard ‘one to which the authors reer in alter char. e Summary 41.120 AL one time, the comparatine achantages ac dsachaniages fnterational arbitration as opposed to Iigation were much debuted, The debate is now over. Orion has moved stony in {aour of intematicnalabiration fr the resalten of iteration disputes. 4.421. knpurely domestic ésputs, tho question of whether to titrate oF to litigate may be ly bekanced. nthe ra analysis, much may depend upon the circumstances of each particular case and the reputation and procedures ofthe local courts. However, ‘Where the question arises inaninlmational transaction, the balance comes dav imi in four of rtration. ra domestic Cortext, parties who are looking fora binding decision ona spite wil usually have an offectne chotce betwen a ational cout are nator arbitration. In an intemalionalcortext thee is no such Chalce. There is no iteratonal cout to deal wth iterator corrmercial disputes. "In fect, the rea choice is between ‘ecouuse to a naloral cost and recourse to ilemalinal stration, 41.422. Aclaimant who decides to take cout proceecings wil inthe absence of ery agreed submission othe jussdiction oa paricar out, usualy be obliged to have recourse tothe cout ofthe defendant's nome coxnty, pace of business, [3200 2" or residence To the claimant, ths court (as aeady sited) wi be fern in ery sense of that word—in nature, cherecer, and cig. ‘The claimant vill neal net be abe tobe represented by layers fits oan nately, wth whom the claimant is accustomed to, oaling, but instead wl hae to use tho services of foreign layer. ‘The clamant may vel etal te laruage ofthe cout spat that the contract, 80th essential documents and edence wil have tobe tarsal, wih al tho atlendant costs, delay, and ‘pportuntes for msunderstandng to which that may ge rise. Fal, tho clamant may fd that the court is unaccustomed 9 intemetional commercial transactions and that its practices and procedures are not adoquate to dea with them. When ewes against tis background, the prospect of bringing a claim arising out fan iterate binesstarsacten ble 3g casts ret atracthe. 4.423 fone ofthe parties tothe contract isa State or State erty, the prospect wil be even less aractve. Th prize pty to the ‘corkrat wl be reluctant to have is ispule submtid a the national couts ofthe State party. The priate party wil usually hae litle no krowdedge ofthe law and practice ofthat court and wil be afd of encountering judges predisposed to fn in favour of the ‘overmert to which they ono thr agpoktment. Fors par, the Stet (r State ently) concerned vl rot wish to submit tothe national courts of the rate party. Indeed. it wll probably object to ‘umniting tothe juristion of any foreign cour. 41.424 nsituations ofthis kind, recourse ointeratonal titration in a comvenint and neutral frum, is generally soon as mere ‘acceptabe than course to atonal cuts. i pay mace alracthe to establish acarluly chosen tibunal of expexienced “trates, with knawedge ofthe lang.nge othe contac, ard an “Understanding ofthe cormmaxcial intentions of the pares, wo ill ‘tin a neutral courtyard do thor best to cary out the reasonable ‘expectations ofthe parties, than itis fo erust the resolution ofthe ‘spt tothe cout of one ofthe parties, which may lack expaiance (of commercial matters or may. ate simpy, be biased in aso of the local pay. 41.125. For mary business poopie this isthe decisive argument in {our of intemationalabivtion, as the ory truly neutral math of ‘obtaining a decision on a dispute under a contract imoling patios ‘of cferertrationalies. As ane commentator has said Although thee are mary reasons why partes might prefer ineretional atatration to retional courts as a system of spute resolution, the th is that maryseas of 2) page 5" iteratonal commercial jzily,lemetalatatvaton th only blo tion ras once fareusly pu 'the only gana toon. Naina cuts may bo considered ral, Inowporenced, ureable,etioert, pote, aeretio to pressure r simply haste. The ator and mare Sigucart th trarsaction in quostin, ols crop, ome sky, national curt maybe. ‘eso, where a thr couray’s courts cares bo ‘goad upon ielareticnl ativan bac an crt moctarism actely to avoid a priclar retinal cout) I would seam that corporate counsel tond to share this opinicn =) 1 Alternative dispute resolution 4.126 Ths, it may bo said, fs all very wal, but arbitration (ike tigation) s'a contentious process. Would it ot be batter the pats wore to sete thir ferences inaless confontationat manner? Th answers that here are tema (and ess Cortrntationl) methods of dispute resoaion and whilst this book 'S concomed vith irtematorl arbiation, a bit rte on these altematves may be heipt 4.427 Tho fist rue fr partis o an itematonal ésputes to ty to resoke the dspute for themsohes. Te patos ae—or should be— in the best postion to know the strengths ard weaknesses oftheir respective cases. ded, Is increasingly commen fora clause to be Inserted in rtamationl contracts tothe effet that, fa dispute arses, the partes should try to resolve iby negotiation, before proceeding to some system of disput resalution. One particular fonda, cen found in long-term agreements, is tothe eect that in the event ofa dspute arising tho parties wil frst endeznes to reach assattlement, by negotiations ‘in good fat. Te prblem is tht an ‘blgation to nogaliate ‘in good ft is nebulous. °°) Whos to ‘open negations? How long are they t last’ How fr does a party fed to goin order to show good fat’? Is a pty obliged to make Concessions, xen on malta of principle, in ord to demenstato (0c faith? Bago 41.128 No negotiation is likely to succeed unless those inched ae capele of looking atthe crucial issues abjecthely, Uke an ousigo fbsener. Hower, cbjectvt is dificult to an When viel interests {ard perhaps the ture ofthe business) are under trea. is here tha an impatialthed party may hep to rescue dscussions which ‘are al isk of gating nowhere, This is why inlematinal cenvects ‘ten rode that, Bef the parties embark upon itigaion or ‘atitration, they vill endeavour to seta ary spite by sere frm of altematve dispute resolution (ADR) 1. What is meant by ADR? 4.129 Tho growing cost fig in tho ited States ga iso {6a search fr quicker ad cheaper methods of ispute rescution: andithis cost was measured not ony in lawyers! fees and expenses, but aso in maragement and execute time, made werse by procedural delaying tactics, omrerowded court ists, ar tho jury Ital of cul cases, ten leading tothe anard of hupaly excessive \damages against major coporations (and tel insures) 4.130 _Those altemsative methods of dispete resolution are usualy ‘gfcuped together under the goneral heating of ADR. Some of them ‘come clase o ariation nts comertonal sense, Others—in pata, mediation and cancion are seen as fst steps inthe ‘Satlemant of a dispute, to be flowed (f unsuccessu) by titration or iigaion. Accordingly, although there are specialist ‘Works on ADR, which this book does not pretend to be, it may be ‘use to deseo rif wba is meart by ADR, how it works: and wey it has developed as a method of rescuing dsputes. 41.431. When something is described as an ‘aitemati!, tho obvious questions ‘temative to what? Waltematve dspute resclution is Corcetved as an iterate’ to the fal procedures adopted by the courts ofiaw as part ofa system of justice estabshed and ‘administered by the Stato, atitaion should be property cassiod ‘38a method o'atematie ispute resolution. is ined a very real lerative to the caus of lav. Howovr, te term ADRs ot advays ‘used in this wid (x itright be said, precise) sense. Accordingly, forthe purpose of ts section, abitation is nc incu:Atitraton presents an alteratie tothe jcicial rocess in fring pmacy tothe partes as wall as Procedural exibly. However, ts nonetheless furelarertaly tho sare in tha tho roe ofthe arbitrators judgmental. The futon of the judge anc the aitater isnot to decide how the problem resulting in the dispute can most ready be resoed ssomuch as to appotion responsi for that bier!" Bove 8 4.182 There are many cfrent forms of ADR. Tho broad distinction, ower, would seem to be between those methods — ‘such as mediation nd cancion —in which an independent tid patty tres to bring the fsputing partes to a compromise agreement ‘and those in which, in one way or anther, a binding decison is imposed upon te ates, what tho oats fat o ‘tiation. 1, Nor-binding ADR Mediation 41433 Mediatien les al the haar of ADR. Parties who have fale to resolve a spe or themeehes tum to an independert thd person. ‘or mediator, iho wl stan to an ouline ofthe pute are then meet each party separatly—often shutting’ betwoon then =) — and try to parsuade the partes to moderate ther respective poaitons."" The task ofthe mediatr isto attempt to persuade ‘each party to focus on its real interests, rather than on what i ‘concaies tobe lis contractual ar legal ertilement. Conciliation 4.434 The toms medio! and ‘conection’ ae often used as if they are interchangeable; and there Is ne ganeralayeement 2s 10 howto define them Historically. a conelator was soon as someone \Who went a stop futher than the mediator, soto speak, in that the Cconcator would craw up and propase the tems ofan agreement that he or she considered represented a fr saltement. In practice, the two tems seem to have merged. 4.495 The UNCTTRAL Conclation Rules, which were recorrmended by the General Assembly ofthe United Nations in December 1980, may be considered var brily as an example of how the concition process werk." Fst, the pats age that they wl ty to settle any isput by conciliation. This may be done ‘ad hoo—that sto say, once a dspute has arsen—or it may be ‘done by pir aggeament, by inserting aprousion fer cancion or ‘mediation nthe contract" and the eleant ules deal nt only ‘wh the concilation process its, but also with =) pa 46: impatat prodsiens such as the asst in subsoquert Tito or arbtvation of evdance r documents pat forward during the eonciation. 7) 41.436. The ole ofthe conclater isto make proposals fo a ‘allem The proposals need not bein wring, ad need nt ‘cota reasons ‘The conciiator assists the partis in an indopendent ‘and impartial manner intel ater to reach an ‘amicable setement of thei dispute," “Toh extent isa conciatr free to disclose to one pty infrmation Guen to him or her in pra by the cer party? The UNCTTRAL Corciition Rules prove! that a conciator may disclose the substance of any factual information he or she recekes, in order thatthe ther party may have the oppo to present ary explanatin which he considers apropiats 41437 tno settlement is reached during the cours othe proceedings, the conciator may fermuate the terms of a possitie ‘setlemani and suit them othe partes for thar cbsenations. The process comes to an end ether when a selleentisactiowed or ‘when it appears tht no setlement is possite.""") 4.198. 12002, UNCITRAL published its Model Law on iteration Convnercal Canela, wich is irtended as a guide for States that wish to implement legislation or concation. =") Mediation/abitration41.139 One procedure for dispute resolution thats increasingly Used intemetional commercial contacts Is a mixed procadue of ‘mediation and abiration known, nol surprisingly. as ‘Med/AtS “There ae broadly two versions of ths [9 p2g° 17" procedure: in the fst the medaten fas, the medatr becares the arbtratr, in the second, the mediation fs, the role ofthe mectator is {emia and the dispute goes to an aia tibura. 4.440 The frst version, in which the mediator becomes an titrate, i usedin th United States (for instance, in labour ‘spus). Toa anyer, it raises many questions. For exarpl, how ‘fark are the parties likely tobe in ther discussions with the mediator (for instance, by indcaling what setlemert proposals thoy would acco), whist knowing tat, iter is no seller, that ‘Same parson wil change has and appear as an abivator? And how ‘can an ata who has previously hed pate discussions wih the parties separatlysatsy (or appear to stil) the requirements cf impariaty and’ fr hearing”? Tho secend version Is paily mote satisfactory way of proceeding, it makes clear the diferent ‘oles ofa mediator (ho aftempls to facile negotiations for a

You might also like

• The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck: A Counterintuitive Approach to Living a Good Life

  

  From Everand

  The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck: A Counterintuitive Approach to Living a Good Life

  Mark Manson

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (5813)
• The Gifts of Imperfection: Let Go of Who You Think You're Supposed to Be and Embrace Who You Are

  

  From Everand

  The Gifts of Imperfection: Let Go of Who You Think You're Supposed to Be and Embrace Who You Are

  Brené Brown

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (1092)
• Never Split the Difference: Negotiating As If Your Life Depended On It

  

  From Everand

  Never Split the Difference: Negotiating As If Your Life Depended On It

  Chris Voss

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (844)
• • Magazines
  • Podcasts
  • Sheet music
• Principles: Life and Work

  

  From Everand

  Principles: Life and Work

  Ray Dalio

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (608)
• The Glass Castle: A Memoir

  

  From Everand

  The Glass Castle: A Memoir

  Jeannette Walls

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (1716)
• Grit: The Power of Passion and Perseverance

  

  From Everand

  Grit: The Power of Passion and Perseverance

  Angela Duckworth

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (590)
• Sing, Unburied, Sing: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  Sing, Unburied, Sing: A Novel

  Jesmyn Ward

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (1104)
• Hidden Figures: The American Dream and the Untold Story of the Black Women Mathematicians Who Helped Win the Space Race

  

  From Everand

  Hidden Figures: The American Dream and the Untold Story of the Black Women Mathematicians Who Helped Win the Space Race

  Margot Lee Shetterly

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (897)
• Shoe Dog: A Memoir by the Creator of Nike

  

  From Everand

  Shoe Dog: A Memoir by the Creator of Nike

  Phil Knight

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (540)
• The Perks of Being a Wallflower

  

  From Everand

  The Perks of Being a Wallflower

  Stephen Chbosky

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (2104)
• The Hard Thing About Hard Things: Building a Business When There Are No Easy Answers

  

  From Everand

  The Hard Thing About Hard Things: Building a Business When There Are No Easy Answers

  Ben Horowitz

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (348)
• Bad Feminist: Essays

  

  From Everand

  Bad Feminist: Essays

  Roxane Gay

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (1018)
• Elon Musk: Tesla, SpaceX, and the Quest for a Fantastic Future

  

  From Everand

  Elon Musk: Tesla, SpaceX, and the Quest for a Fantastic Future

  Ashlee Vance

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (474)
• Her Body and Other Parties: Stories

  

  From Everand

  Her Body and Other Parties: Stories

  Carmen Maria Machado

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (822)
• The Outsider: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  The Outsider: A Novel

  Stephen King

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (1850)
• The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer

  

  From Everand

  The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer

  Siddhartha Mukherjee

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (271)
• The Sympathizer: A Novel (Pulitzer Prize for Fiction)

  

  From Everand

  The Sympathizer: A Novel (Pulitzer Prize for Fiction)

  Viet Thanh Nguyen

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (122)
• Angela's Ashes: A Memoir

  

  From Everand

  Angela's Ashes: A Memoir

  Frank McCourt

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (441)
• Brooklyn: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  Brooklyn: A Novel

  Colm Toibin

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (1947)
• The Little Book of Hygge: Danish Secrets to Happy Living

  

  From Everand

  The Little Book of Hygge: Danish Secrets to Happy Living

  Meik Wiking

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (401)
• A Man Called Ove: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  A Man Called Ove: A Novel

  Fredrik Backman

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (4610)
• The Art of Racing in the Rain: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  The Art of Racing in the Rain: A Novel

  Garth Stein

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (4203)
• Steve Jobs

  

  From Everand

  Steve Jobs

  Walter Isaacson

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (807)
• The World Is Flat 3.0: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century

  

  From Everand

  The World Is Flat 3.0: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century

  Thomas L. Friedman

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (2259)
• A Tree Grows in Brooklyn

  

  From Everand

  A Tree Grows in Brooklyn

  Betty Smith

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (1929)
• The Yellow House: A Memoir (2019 National Book Award Winner)

  

  From Everand

  The Yellow House: A Memoir (2019 National Book Award Winner)

  Sarah M. Broom

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (98)
• Devil in the Grove: Thurgood Marshall, the Groveland Boys, and the Dawn of a New America

  

  From Everand

  Devil in the Grove: Thurgood Marshall, the Groveland Boys, and the Dawn of a New America

  Gilbert King

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (266)
• Yes Please

  

  From Everand

  Yes Please

  Amy Poehler

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (1898)
• Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln

  

  From Everand

  Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln

  Doris Kearns Goodwin

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (234)
• A Heartbreaking Work Of Staggering Genius: A Memoir Based on a True Story

  

  From Everand

  A Heartbreaking Work Of Staggering Genius: A Memoir Based on a True Story

  Dave Eggers

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (231)
• The Woman in Cabin 10

  

  From Everand

  The Woman in Cabin 10

  Ruth Ware

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (2521)
• Fear: Trump in the White House

  

  From Everand

  Fear: Trump in the White House

  Bob Woodward

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (738)
• Wolf Hall: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  Wolf Hall: A Novel

  Hilary Mantel

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (3811)
• John Adams

  

  From Everand

  John Adams

  David McCullough

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (2409)
• On Fire: The (Burning) Case for a Green New Deal

  

  From Everand

  On Fire: The (Burning) Case for a Green New Deal

  Naomi Klein

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (74)
• The Light Between Oceans: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  The Light Between Oceans: A Novel

  M.L. Stedman

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (789)
• Manhattan Beach: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  Manhattan Beach: A Novel

  Jennifer Egan

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (792)
• The Constant Gardener: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  The Constant Gardener: A Novel

  John le Carré

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (104)
• The Unwinding: An Inner History of the New America

  

  From Everand

  The Unwinding: An Inner History of the New America

  George Packer

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (45)
• Rise of ISIS: A Threat We Can't Ignore

  

  From Everand

  Rise of ISIS: A Threat We Can't Ignore

  Jay Sekulow

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (137)
• Little Women

  

  From Everand

  Little Women

  Louisa May Alcott

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (104)
• New Doc 2020-02-28 17.50.16 PDF

  

  Document9 pages

  New Doc 2020-02-28 17.50.16 PDF

  Padma Bhushan

  No ratings yet
• 8-Chapter 5 PDF

  

  Document110 pages

  8-Chapter 5 PDF

  Padma Bhushan

  No ratings yet
• UNIDROIT Principles On International Commercial Contracts - PICC

  

  Document20 pages

  UNIDROIT Principles On International Commercial Contracts - PICC

  Padma Bhushan

  No ratings yet
• Analysis of The International Oil Price Fluctuatio PDF

  

  Document8 pages

  Analysis of The International Oil Price Fluctuatio PDF

  Padma Bhushan

  No ratings yet
• L Introduction: Partition-A Survey of The Law in Alberta

  

  Document28 pages

  L Introduction: Partition-A Survey of The Law in Alberta

  Padma Bhushan

  No ratings yet
• Transfer of Property Act

  

  Document1 page

  Transfer of Property Act

  Padma Bhushan

  No ratings yet
• Social Capital Online 7 The Network Spectacle.

  

  Document26 pages

  Social Capital Online 7 The Network Spectacle.

  Padma Bhushan

  No ratings yet
• Moving Towards A Kafkaesque Society 2

  

  Document9 pages

  Moving Towards A Kafkaesque Society 2

  Padma Bhushan

  No ratings yet