Search

Arbitration has dominated the landscape of the resolution of international commercial disputes (that is, private disputes involving transnational connections). Nevertheless, the last fifteen years have witnessed a proliferation in the establishment of new commercial courts in several countries, with the aim of attracting international commercial disputes. This article makes the novel argument that such attempts are unlikely to render adjudication an attractive alternative to arbitration. For the new international commercial courts to fully realize their potential and produce a sustainable market of adjudication, some mechanism is needed to secure the enforceability of jurisdiction clauses and the judgments delivered by courts in other jurisdictions. Although such mechanism is provided by the 2005 Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements, this convention has failed to gain international support. This is puzzling given that this convention adopts the same principles that enabled the success of the 1958 New York Arbitration Convention—namely enforcing party choice of forum and facilitating enforcement of the resolution’s outcome. This article provides the first attempt to analyze the reasons for this failure. To this end, it compares the political and legal conditions under which the two conventions were conceived, showing how the differences in these conditions have led to lower international acceptance of the Hague Convention. This article supports this analysis by focusing on the most recent ratification of the Hague Convention by the UK. We advance the novel argument that this case study demonstrates the important role played by the legal community in the ratification process. We show that, ironically, the UK’s decision to quit the EU in order to restore national sovereignty was a major reason leading to its ratification of the Hague Convention, thus giving up fundamental principles of common law that had granted English courts broad discretion as to whether to enforce jurisdiction clauses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal of Northeastern University (Social Science) / Dongbei Daxue Xuebao (Shehui Kexue Ban) is the property of Dongbei Daxue and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Godišnjak Pravnog Fakulteta u Sarajevu is the property of Godisnjak Pravnog Fakulteta u Sarajevu and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Why is equity a desirable and essential element of commerce and commercial litigation? This article responds to concerns sometimes expressed that equity has little to do with commerce, that contractual disputes do not involve equitable principle and that introducing equitable principles into commerce and commercial litigation leads to uncertainty. This article also addresses the definitional and semantic difficulties inherent in those concerns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Ensayos - Revista de Economía is the property of Ensayos Revista de Economia and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista Chilena de Derecho is the property of Revista Chilena de Derecho and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article discusses concerns related to court delays in Poland and suggests mediation in commercial disputes as a solution to the problem court delays. It describes the experience of Poland's legal system with post-communist transition and reflects on the country's judicial inefficiency. It examines the strengths and weaknesses of mediation in the commercial disputes, and provides information about the European directives and Polish mediation law.

The article reports that "On Amending the Commercial Procedure Code of the Russian Federation" has entered into force on June1, 2016 that establishes a mandatory pre court dispute settlement procedure for all commercial disputes in Russia.

The author begins by examining the global marketplace and the development of regional economic integration associations such as the EEC (European Economic Community) and the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Then the author describes arbitration as one way of settling disputes, but holds that mediation is better. She then describes the role of the mediator, integrative bargaining, the structure of international commercial mediation, and rules governing it. Cross-cultural problems are discussed, and she gives 10 tips to avoid cross-cultural miscommunication. Implications are considered.

The length of trials before a national court and their high costs are two of the main reasons for the emergence of arbitration. Arbitration facilitates shorter and cheaper trials and enables the trial to be conducted by experts according to the will of the parties involved. This is why arbitration is extremely important in settling commercial disputes that can last for a long time. However, over time, due to the growing interest in arbitration and the nature of the disputes brought before arbitration, the processes began to take longer with high costs. To overcome this difficulty, the concept of fast-track arbitration with simplified procedures and fast conduct of the process emerged. This study will present a legal analysis of fast-track arbitration, advantages and disadvantages of expedited arbitration, will emphasize the distinctive properties of expedited arbitration, taking into account provisions in comparative law. Here, the perspective and general principles of expedited arbitration regulated by arbitral institutions in Europe, America and Asia will be explained in detail. Finally, the relationship between the general principles of arbitration and the suitability of fast-track arbitration to those principles will be assessed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Studi Piemontesi is the property of Centro Studi Piemontesi and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Collected Papers of the Faculty of Law in Split / Zbornik Radova Pravnog Fakulteta u Splitu is the property of Split Faculty of Law and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revue de Musicologie is the property of Societe Francaise de Musicologie and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The consumer-based and technology-driven economy has triggered competitiveness amongst companies. In the everevolving market space, the companies have recognised the significance of generating intangible assets such as trademarks, patents, and trade secrets to remain competitive. Due to globalisation, international business transactions with respect to these intangible assets have led to an increase in intellectual property disputes. Moreover, due to IP's complex nature, the risks involved in IP litigation can be burdensome in cross-border IP disputes coupled with the Court's cumbersome procedure. Given that the stakeholders prefer out-of-court dispute resolution systems like arbitration to resolve their commercial disputes, arbitrating IP disputes is slowly gaining traction. Even though India's courts have expressed their leaning towards arbitrating IP disputes, the same has become practically impossible due to various impediments in the existing mechanism. This article surveys the current IP arbitration regime and uncovers the existing impediments and loopholes in IP arbitration. Further, the article explores the possibility of liberalising the IP arbitration regime by taking cues from jurisdictions across the globe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revue de Musicologie is the property of Societe Francaise de Musicologie and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The Belt and Road Initiative (BR1) is part of an ambitions national strategy to promote the PRC's economic and foreign policies to help take a larger role in global affairs. This is being implemented through PRC

Much of the core work of government is now done pursuant to contract with private sector bodies, primarily for efficiency reasons. While the phenomenon of contracting out of governmental functions has attracted increasing scholarly attention in terms of public law accountability, the use of commercial arbitration for the resolution of contractual disputes involving governments has until recently attracted scant attention. The law regulating commercial arbitration does not distinguish between arbitrations between private actors and arbitrations involving governments, treating all commercial disputes as wholly private in nature. By controlling government action, arbitrators contribute to governance but without the hallmarks of the judicial process such as impartiality, transparency, the possibility for third-party participation and judicial oversight. As such, the law does not take into account the public dimension of disputes under government contracts or the role of arbitrators as adjudicators of public law disputes. Nor do there appear to be any constitutional constraints on the use of arbitration in government contracts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

China participated in the Singapore Convention on Mediation in 2019 with the aim of attempting to construct an effective mechanism to resolve international commercial disputes. This article anabses the challenges of the Singapore Convention to the Chinese mediation system by exploring the different functions and ideologies of dispute resolutions in different social contexts. The tension between the Singapore Convention and the domestic mediation law in China is analysed at both definitional and Tegulatory levels. The article concludes that not only is the tension conducive to the controversy around legal texts and institutional settings, but it also reflects the cultural and social differences beneath them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The implementation of mediation, which is an alternative dispute resolution method, started in 2013 on the basis of the principle of voluntariness. The Law No. 6325 on Mediation in Legal Disputes clearly stipulates the totally voluntary nature of mediation by stating that “Parties are free to apply to a mediator and to resume, conclude or withdraw from the process”. The parties can save time and expense if the dispute is resolved with the support of a mediator in an environment where the parties can express themselves under equal circumstances. Indeed, many countries throughout the world apply the mediation in their law system. However, voluntary mediation constitutes the basis of this application. Nevertheless, in Turkey, the mediation process becomes mandatory for some of the disputes that arise from commercial and labor law. In this study, firstly general information regarding to Turkish Commercial Code and brief history of alternative dispute resolution methods in Turkey will be explained. Then following concerns will be stated with regard to the commercial disputes; jeopardy of ensuring justice as an obligation of the state and the absolute sovereignty of state-owned jurisdiction and right of direct access to independent and impartial courts, restricting the freedom of the party's will by making mediation mandatory which is deemed as an alternative. In addition to this, specific concerns such as uncertainty of application area in commercial disputes and board members’ liability will be explained. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article compares the major instruments of International Commercial Arbitration (hereinafter 'ICA') with the instruments of International Commercial Litigation and Mediation. By so doing, the article comparatively assesses the success of ICA, litigation, and mediation as alternative mechanisms of transnational commercial dispute resolution. Accordingly, the article argues that, while the ICA is not the only means of transnational commercial dispute resolution, it will continue to be the most successful means of dispute resolution, playing the dominant role in harmonizing the rules of transnational commercial dispute resolution. However, the article also argues that, over time, transnational commercial litigation and mediation are becoming more viable alternatives to ICA in resolving transnational commercial disputes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Ankara Barosu Dergileri is the property of Ankara Bar Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

For over forty years, China has promulgated national policies of opening-up and cooperation with other nations. Over the past eight years, China has been expanding its efforts to uphold these policy goals via the Belt and Road Initiative, China's global infrastructure project. With this increase in international economic activity and commercial transactions, China has recognized the need for judicial reform to better serve the legal needs of foreign parties. Given China's preference for peaceful cooperation, arbitration, and mediation, reform was necessary to cater to the needs of foreign parties who prefer litigation. In parallel with the Belt and Road Initiative, China has expanded its domestic dispute resolution mechanisms to provide broad legal resources for Belt and Road transacting parties. China has outlined its commitment to provide a fair, predictable, and law-based business environment for international parties in a series of opinions issued by the Supreme People's Court of China. Further, China has forged key legal instruments to support its commitment to provide fair and consistent court judgments: (1) establishment of the International Commercial Courts; (2) issuance of BRI-specific guiding cases, and (3) commitment to expanded application of the principle of reciprocity in the enforcement of foreign judgments. While China's extensive domestic judicial reform, to some extent, has been consistent with its promulgated policies and Belt and Road goals, the vagueness of the Supreme People's Court opinions outlining the reforms still present distinct logistical challenges to achieving fair, predictable, and consistent court judgments. As a result, Belt and Road parties choosing to litigate their international commercial disputes may face hurdles in their pursuit of fair and predictable legal protections in court. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

At present, commercial disputes account for a large portion of cases the court has to handle in China. However, the court is still resorting to traditional civil law concepts or administrative law concepts when solving these commercial disputes. This has created a lot of troubles when deciding such cases. By analyzing several sample cases, this paper aims to demonstrate the importance and the urgency to realize the independence of commercial dispute trials through throwing light on the following issues: the special characteristics of the commercial law concepts; the special characteristics of the means of remedies in commercial cases; the special characteristics of the commercial laws and regulations; and the internationalization of commercial law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers information on the evolution of the manifest disregard of law doctrine by the International Commercial Disputes Committee (the Committee) for arbitrating international commercial disputes in New York. It informs that the manifest disregard doctrine is used for rendering an arbitrational award in the U.S. It discusses the U.S. Supreme Court case Wilko v. Swan regarding interpretations of the law by the arbitrators under the Federal Arbitration Act.

The article focuses on the analysis of the alternative dispute resolution in commercial transactions, in particular on the commercial arbitration and its role in the sphere of international economic relation. The research begins with identifying the causes that have led to the multiplication of trade disputes. In order to indicate the framework of the analysis, the paper continues with terminological clarifications and definitions of commercial arbitration and the identification of the main international arbitration organizations. The objective of the paper is to highlight the advantages of commercial arbitration in ensuring a beneficial environment for the international trade transactions through settling efficiently the disputes arising between the parties. The author focuses on an assessment over the activity of the Court of International Commercial Arbitration attached to the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Romania by exemplifying two cases of international commercial disputes settled through commercial arbitration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), with its large-scale planned and ongoing projects covering the broad Eurasian area, will inevitably generate trade and investment disputes. Many countries have responded to the growing demand for international commercial dispute resolution with relevant measures like establishing international commercial courts and/or dispute resolution centres. Apart from these countries, many arbitral institutions are positioning themselves as an attractive forum for addressing BRI disputes. Not to be outdone, China has attempted to build its own mechanism for BRI dispute resolution, protecting the interests of Chinese and foreign parties. This article discusses the model provided by China, ie, a multiple and "one-stop" mechanism framed under the China International Commercial Court, serving commercial disputes arising from BRI projects. This article intends to provide a comprehensive review of the Chinese model and suggests further steps that are necessary to improve it. It explores the motivation and reasons behind this Chinese model. It analyses the current framework and key features of this model. It further discusses the internal and external challenges and implications. It argues that complementary measures and further clarifications are required to support the well-functioning of the model. It also indicates that currently there is no "one-size-fits-all" method of resolving BRI disputes. But China could encourage all BRI participants to make a concerted effort to encourage cooperation among existing institutions and harmonisation of relevant commercial rules along the route. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Annals for Istrian & Mediterranean Studies / Annales: Series Historia et Sociologia is the property of Historical Society of Southern Primorska of Koper and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Disputes between individuals can be resolved by trial or they could also be resolved by non-judicial methods. The parties may conduct the proceedings by applying to state courts or by arbitration. However, the parties can resort to alternative dispute resolution methods instead of resorting to the jurisdiction, if they wish to settle the dispute by other alternative resolution methods. With the help of alternative resolution methods, the dispute between the parties is generally negotiated in a neutral environment with the help of a third party so that the parties agree. Although there are many alternative dispute resolution methods, the most preferred method in practice is mediation. Due to Mediation being accepted as mandatory in terms of some disputes in Turkish Law, its field of application is expanding day by day. In Turkish Law, an application for mediation in terms of labor disputes has become mandatory. In terms of these disputes, the parties have to apply to the mediator before resorting to the jurisdiction. Likewise, it is mandatory to apply for mediation in terms of commercial disputes. Turkish law regulates mandatory application not only in terms of mediation but also in terms of some other dispute resolution methods. For example, it is mandatory to apply to consumer arbitration committees before applying to the consumer court in disputes arising from consumer transactions that are below certain monetary limits. In this study, firstly alternative dispute resolution methods and the advantages of these methods will be mentioned and how the most frequently used alternative dispute resolution method in practice, which is voluntary and mandatory mediation, is regulated in Turkish Law will be examined in detail. Besides, the working procedure of consumer arbitration committees, which is regulated as a mandatory application authority for the settlement of disputes arising from consumer transactions in Turkish Law, shall also be mentioned. Then, the concept of mediation in collective labor disputes, which is one of the first examples of alternative dispute resolution methods in Turkish Law, and the concept of settlement in disputes of administrations related to private law, will also be explained. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article aims to provide a general summary on Turkish law on arbitration and other alternative dispute resolution mechanisms by emphasizing the resolution of disputes involving foreign elements. First the legal instruments, on which the international arbitration in Turkey is based, will be handled. Some of the basic features of Turkish International Arbitration Law and the procedure of the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards will be overviewed. Procedural and substantial issues that may arise during arbitration or enforcement procedures such as the questions as to arbitrability, the validity of arbitration agreements and the impact of public policy will be dealt with, by exemplifying decisions rendered by Turkish courts in setting aside procedures and in enforcement of foreign arbitral awards procedures. Secondly, the other ADR mechanisms available in Turkish law will be examined. In this respect, the mandatory requirement to apply to ‘consumer arbitration panels’ for disputes below certain monetary limits will be handled. Furthermore, disputes which are capable of settlement by voluntary mediation and disputes for which mandatory mediation is required will be dealt with. Application to mediation prior to court litigation is regulated as a mandatory condition for certain cases regarding labour or commercial disputes. So, the applicability of mandatory mediation to claims involving foreign elements will be questioned. Moreover, the impact of mediation procedures carried out in a foreign country and the question of whether such mediation fulfils the mandatory condition will be discussed. Besides, the ADR mechanisms and the applicability of mandatory mediation in family law disputes will be evaluated. And finally, a general overview will be made on the status of institutional arbitration in Turkey. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista de Indias is the property of Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This paper analyses the potential for international arbitration to provide effective remedy for business-related human rights abuses. Since the proliferation of international arbitration, the default arbitration mechanism as it stands has been contemplated by and large for the resolution of cross-border commercial disputes where the primary interests are efficiency and finality. However, there is evidence that human rights issues have emerged in international arbitration. Accordingly, if arbitration is to be used in such cases, the mechanism must be adapted in light of the particular issues that arise in the adjudication of human rights; the balance between transparency and confidentiality, reprisals against victims and human rights defenders, collective redress, financial assistance, the applicability of human rights standards. If proper procedures are in place to contemplate the particular interests involved in cases where the substantive claims involve human rights, the advantage of international arbitration is that it can provide direct access in a neutral forum for holding companies accountable where national jurisdictions are unavailable or difficult to access. This article begins by analysing the historical development of international arbitration so as to demonstrate a pattern of adaptability and flexibility vis-à-vis the subject matter of cross-border disputes. The article will then contemplate the potential of and concerns for international arbitration, putting forward specific recommendations for reforms of the international arbitration mechanism in cases where the substantive claims involve business-related human rights abuses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The successful conclusion of a settlement agreement by the disputing parties is considered as the core of a mediation. Under the Asia-Pacific Regional Mediation Organization (hereinafter "ARMO"), it is provided that the settlement agreements are binding upon the disputing parties, and shall be carried out in good faith. This is an indication that non-compliance with the settlement agreement will constitute a violation of the ARMO Agreement and trigger a state responsibility. This provision is an exclusive feature of the ARMO. It might also have importance in deterring a state's non-compliance in the future, and thus enhance the legal security of the outcome reached in ARMO mediation. There is no specific enforcement mechanism for the ARMO facilitated settlement agreements. In order to further elaborate the particularities of the ARMO, and to clarify what distinguishes it from other dispute settlement mechanisms in enforcement, this paper will discuss the ARMO enforcement issue, and provide a comparative review of the enforcement mechanism of investment arbitral awards under the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) and issues on cross-border enforcement of mediated settlement agreements in commercial disputes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper presents the mediation legislation of Cyprus and the actual practice of mediation in the island if any. The recent developments and upcoming actions or initiatives on mediation in Cyprus on behalf of the Ministry of Justice, such as the draft law on mediation offamily disputes, which is currently under parliamentary review and the proposed reform of the mediation law 159/2012, are also discussed in the paper. In this framework, the goal of the paper is to present the provisions of mediation legislation in Cyprus, the emergence of its problems and gaps, and some critical remarks on the direction to improve the legislation and to promote mediation in practice via compulsory mediation in some categories of civil and/or commercial disputes, as a possible regulatory change in order to succeed actual mediation practice in Cyprus. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As the impact of Brexit intensifies, a number of jurisdictions have increasingly sought to increase their standing as dispute resolution venues forfinancial market and commercial disputes. The aim is to ensure, as businesses move post-Brexit, that their dispute resolution moves with them. In the EU, this race for an alternative place to argue has seen Paris propose a specialist "chamber" that would sit within its existing system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Ankara Barosu Dergileri is the property of Ankara Bar Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The need for the development of arbitration for adjudicating disputes in Romania and its application is more visible especially with respect to commercial disputes. Nevertheless, the establishment of BIAC, a court specialized in the adjudication of disputes pursuant to arbitration will assist as well the Romanian sports world, especially due to the nature of sport disputes and the rapidity with which they need to be addressed. The aim of this arbitration court is mainly to resolve disputes in commercial matters, nonetheless its arbitrators also have the requisite know-how to adjudicate sport disputes. The advantages of resolving disputes by arbitration are numerous compared to litigation in the regular courts. The overall lower cost of proceedings, the rapidity in which a dispute is solved and the collegial environment in which the parties debate and resolve their disputes are only a number of them. Thus, there is a considerable need for an arbitration court to address disputes involving multinationals and foreign investors which are very active in the Romanian market as well as sporting disputes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the need of establishing a full and consistent set of rules across Europe to settle the jurisdiction in international commercial disputes and to apply to all contractual and tortious claims and replace national laws.

Qatar and Dubai have established financial centres which are based on the common law jurisdiction of England and Wales because of the advantages such a system can give to the development of their respective financial services industries. The Qatar Financial Centre (QFC) and the Dubai Internatinal Financial Centre (DIFC) each have specialist courts, also based on English common law principles, to resolve civil and commercial disputes. These courts fall outside the framework which otherwise governs domestic courts in Qatar and Dubai. The benefits of the QFC and the DIFC set-up include familiarity to foreign investors, by being based on common law jurisdictions, laws and regulations which are written in English, as well as being overseen by both an independent judiciary and an independent regulatory body. The scope of this article is to compare the court systems of both the QFC and the DIFC, particularly the enforceability of the courts' judgments and the enforceability of the arbitration award, and to assess whether one financial centre is preferable over the other financial centre on the basis of the enforceability of court judgments and the enforcement of arbitral awards. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Perspectiva Econômica is the property of Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act ("FSIA") provides the exclusivebasis for suing a foreign sovereign in United States courts. While the FSIA generally grants immunity to foreign sovereigns, it also lays out anumber of exceptions under which U.S. courts may exercise jurisdiction. Thus, plaintiffs have used this statute as a basis to sue foreign governments and their agencies and instrumentalities in a variety of contexts, ranging from purely commercial disputes to wrongful death claims on behalf of victims of state-sponsored terrorism. The purpose of this Review is to provide an overview of the primary areas of litigation under the FSIA throughan analysis of judicial decisions invoking the statute in 2014. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the origins of diversity jurisdiction (DJ) in America in relation to the adjudication of several "Prize Cases" during the American Revolutionary War. According to the article, DJ was designed to provide a venue for commercial disputes. U.S. federal courts and the views of the Framers of the nation's Constitution are mentioned, along with the Second U.S. Continental Congress and American legal history. The U.S. Judiciary Act of 1789 and privateering cases are examined.

The article focuses on the rules applicable to foreign arbitral awards in the Macau Special Administrative Region of China. Topics discussed include the legal framework for the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in the Macau Special Administrative Region, the use of international commercial arbitration for resolving international commercial disputes, and the role of commercial arbitration in China-related trade. It also mentions the role of international arbitration in globalization.

The article discusses a report of the International Commercial Disputes Committee of the New York City Bar Association on issues posed by the publication of arbitral awards and decisions. It discusses issues related to the practices of the international arbitration institutions considered by the international arbitration community and issues posed by publication such as confidentiality, changes in the content and style of awards, and cost of selection and editing of awards for publication.

The article focuses on the condition, in which an arbitrator facilitates a settlement within arbitral proceedings. Topics discussed include the differences between arbitration, mediation and conciliation, the concept of arbitration after mediation(Med-Arb), and the AAA code of ethics for arbitrators in commercial disputes. It discusses rules for the facilitation of settlement in international arbitration adopted by the Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution Commission.