
The Functions of Arbitral Institutions
Description
Alles über E-Books | Antworten auf Fragen rund um E-Books, Kopierschutz und Dateiformate finden Sie in unserem Info- & Hilfebereich.
This book rectifies this paradoxical gap. It offers a clear yet nuanced overview of the diverse and complex reality of institutional arbitration, while challenging the assumptions conventionally held as to the role of arbitral institutions.
This book is the product of a systematic study of the activities performed by over forty leading international arbitration institutions worldwide in their administration of cases (including the ICC, LCIA, ICDR, SCC, SIAC, HKIAC, JAMS, CIETAC, KLRCA, DIS, DIA, NAI, CEPANI etc.). This book also examines a wealth of court decisions and bibliographical sources from the leading civil law and common law jurisdictions (e.g., France, England & Wales, the United Sates, Switzerland, Germany).
This book is invaluable to academics and practitioners interested in furthering their theoretical and practical understanding of institutional arbitration and arbitral institutions.
More details
Other editions
Additional editions

Content
- Intro
- Halftitle Page
- Volume
- Title
- Copyright
- Dedication
- About the Author
- Table of Contents
- Foreword
- Preface
- List of Figures
- List of Tables
- List of Abbreviations
- Acknowledgements
- Introduction
- CHAPTER 1 Understanding the Notion of Arbitral Institution: Definitions and Typologies
- §1.01 Introduction
- §1.02 Defining "Institutional Arbitration"
- [A] Contingent Definitions: Defining Institutional Arbitration by Distinguishing It from Neighbouring Notions
- [1] Institutional Arbitration Defined by Comparison with ad hoc Arbitration
- [2] Institutional Arbitration Defined by Comparison with Judicial Mechanisms
- [B] An Autonomous Definition: Defining Institutional Arbitration by Identifying Its Essential Characteristics
- [1] Permanent Organization
- [2] Arbitration Rules
- [3] The Services
- §1.03 Defining "Arbitral Institutions"
- §1.04 Typologies of Arbitral Institutions
- [A] Legal Status of Arbitral Institutions
- [B] Self-Standing Independent Institutions versus Institutions Connected to Another Organization or a State
- [C] Charitable versus For-Profit
- [D] Types of Cases Handled: Generalist Institutions versus Specialist Ones
- [E] Domestic versus International
- [F] Cultural Background and Historical Heritage
- CHAPTER 2 Institutional Arbitration as a Growing Phenomenon: Quantitative Growth, "Institutionalization" and "Judicialization"
- §2.01 Increasing Use of Institutional Arbitration: The Quantitative Growth
- [A] Increase in the Volume of Cases Referred to Institutions
- [B] Increase in the Number of Institutions
- [C] The Rationale behind the Growth: The Perceived Benefits of Institutional Arbitration
- [1] Logistical Support
- [2] Pre-established Arbitration Rules
- [3] Authority in the Implementation of the Rules
- [4] Treatment of Costs
- [5] Enhanced Enforceability of the Award
- [6] Lower Costs
- [7] Confidentiality
- [D] Popularity of Institutional Arbitration versus Legitimacy of Arbitral Institutions
- §2.02 Institutionalization of Arbitration? The Alleged Qualitative Growth
- [A] Institutionalization of Arbitration
- [B] Institutionalization versus Judicialization
- CHAPTER 3 An Overview of the Activities of Arbitral Institutions: Institutional Arbitration as a Multifacted Reality
- §3.01 Introduction
- §3.02 Non-casework Activities
- [A] Awareness Raising, Training, Advocacy and Policy
- [B] Activities Relating to Other Forms of ADR and ad hoc Arbitration
- §3.03 Casework Activities
- [A] The Initial Stages (Up to the Constitution of the Tribunal)
- [1] Receipt and Notification of the Request for Arbitration
- [2] Which Sets of Rules Apply?
- [3] Decisions on Language
- [4] Decisions regarding the Seat or Place of the Arbitration
- [5] Extension of Deadlines
- [6] Decisions on Jurisdiction
- [7] Interim Measures
- [8] Consolidation of Proceedings
- [9] Joinder of Third Parties
- [10] Constitution of the Tribunal: Decision on the Number of Arbitrators
- [11] Constitution of the Tribunal: Selection of Arbitrators
- [12] Constitution of the Tribunal: Confirmation of Arbitrators
- [B] The Proceedings Proper (from the Constitution of the Tribunal to the Award)
- [1] Approval of Terms of Reference
- [2] Logistical Support
- [3] Treatment of Costs
- [4] Challenges to, and Removal of, Arbitrators
- [5] General Power of Interpretation of the Rules
- [6] General Supervision Role
- [C] The Award and Post-award Phase
- [1] Scrutiny of Draft Awards
- [2] Issue of Awards and Assistance with Enforcement
- §3.04 Different Levels of Institutional Involvement Expressed as A Continuum: The Spectral Representation of Institutional Arbitration
- [A] Why a Continuum?
- [B] Caveat: Limitations of the Spectral Representation of Institutional Arbitration
- [C] First Continuum: From the Filing of a Request for Arbitration to the Constitution of the Tribunal
- [D] Second Continuum: From the Constitution of the Tribunal to the Award
- §3.05 Chapter Conclusions
- CHAPTER 4 The Traditional Representations of the Role of Institutions: A Critical Evaluation
- §4.01 Chapter Introduction
- §4.02 First Representation: An Occasional Participant in the Adjudicative Process Which Decisions Are Somehow Immaterial
- [A] Presentation of the Representation
- [1] Short Overview
- [2] Rationale behind the Representation: The Non-applicability of Due Process Requirements, and the Necessity to Preserve the Effectiveness of Institutional Arbitration
- [3] Origins and Historical Development of the First Representation
- [a] The Société Appareils Dragon Case
- [b] The Société Techni Import Professionnel Case
- [c] The Syrian Refineries Case
- [d] The Opinter v. Dacomex Case
- [e] The SCPA Case
- [f] The REDEC and Pharaon Case
- [g] The Cubic Defense System Case
- [h] The Guinea v. CAP Case
- [i] Recent Decisions
- [B] Critical Analysis of the First Representation: Rejection of the "Administrative" versus "Jurisdictional" Dichotomy
- [1] Rejection of the Arguments Based on Material Criteria
- [a] Argument Based on the Lack of Finality of the Institutional Decisions
- [b] Argument Based on the Timing of Institutional Decisions
- [c] Arguments That Institutional Decisions Do Not Decide between Two Conflicting Positions
- [d] Arguments Based on the Alleged Organizational Character of Institutional Decisions
- [2] Rejection of the Arguments Based on Organic Criteria
- [a] Argument That Institutions Are Not Arbitrators
- [b] Argument That the Parties Have Agreed to Confer a Non-jurisdictional Function to the Institution
- [c] Arguments Based on an Alleged "Unity of the Adjudicative Mission" of the Arbitrator
- [C] Conclusions on the First Representation
- §4.03 Second Representation: A Mere Purveyor of Logistical Services with No Decision-Making Power at All
- [A] Presentation of the Representation
- [B] Critical Analysis of the Representation: Institutions Do Have a Measure of Decision-Making Power
- [C] Conclusions on the Second Representation
- §4.04 Chapter Conclusions
- CHAPTER 5 A Realistic Representation of the Role of Institutions: Arbitral Institutions as Ancillary Participants in the Adjudicative Process
- §5.01 Introduction
- §5.02 Substance of the Representation
- [A] Proposition 1: The Decisional Character of Certain Institutional Measures
- [B] Proposition 2: Ancillary Nature of the Role of the Institution
- [C] Proposition 3: Materiality of Institutional Decisions
- [D] Proposition 4: The Rejection of Dichotomic Approaches
- §5.03 Consequences of the Representation
- [A] Proposition 5: Desirability of the Application of Due Process by Institutions When They Participate in the Adjudicative Mission
- [B] Proposition 6: Identification of the Aspects of Due Process That Are Relevant to the Activities of Arbitral Institutions
- [1] Impartiality and Independence
- [2] Equal Treatment of the Parties
- [3] Adversarial Process
- [4] Reasoning
- [5] Judicial Review of Institutional Decisions
- [C] Proposition 7: Materiality of a Decision as a Viable Proxy for Determining to What Extent Due Process Should Be Complied With
- §5.04 Chapter Conclusions
- CHAPTER 6 General Conclusions
- Appendix Template of Questionnaire Sent Out to Arbitral Institutions
- Bibliography
- Table of Cases
- Table of Arbitration Rules Examined
- Index
System requirements
File format: ePUB
Copy protection: Adobe-DRM (Digital Rights Management)
System requirements:
- Computer (Windows; MacOS X; Linux): Install the free reader Adobe Digital Editions prior to download (see eBook Help).
- Tablet/smartphone (Android; iOS): Install the free app Adobe Digital Editions or the app PocketBook before downloading (see eBook Help).
- E-reader: Bookeen, Kobo, Pocketbook, Sony, Tolino and many more (not Kindle).
The file format ePub works well for novels and non-fiction books – i.e., „flowing” text without complex layout. On an e-reader or smartphone, line and page breaks automatically adjust to fit the small displays.
This eBook uses Adobe-DRM, a „hard” copy protection. If the necessary requirements are not met, unfortunately you will not be able to open the eBook. You will therefore need to prepare your reading hardware before downloading.
Please note: We strongly recommend that you authorise using your personal Adobe ID after installation of any reading software.
For more information, see our ebook Help page.