Author ORCID Identifier

0000-0002-5453-6703

Document Type

Article

Publication Date

2020

Keywords

International dispute resolution, Arbitration, Cross-border litigation, International commercial arbitration

Abstract

The last few years have been momentous ones in the area of cross–border dispute resolution. Numerous countries have sought to bring the innovations of international commercial arbitration into their national legal systems by creating international business courts operating in English and/or with foreign judges sitting alongside national judges, while other jurisdictions have signed onto new international instruments facilitating the resolution of cross–border legal disputes. One of these agreements—the United Nations Convention on International Settlement Agreements Resulting from Mediation (Singapore Convention on Mediation)—came to fruition in record time (a mere five years from start to finish) and with record adherence (an unheard–of forty–six state signatories on the opening day), while another—the Convention of 2 July 2019 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters (Hague Judgments Convention)—has been more than twenty–five years in the making, proving that patience is a virtue in treaty deliberations.

While these initiatives were doubtless influenced by a variety of factors and can be analyzed from a variety of perspectives, one approach that is often overlooked involves the role that comparative law plays in the process, both with respect to decisions involving which projects to pursue and decisions relating to the ultimate shape of the instruments and mechanisms themselves. Comparative law also plays a vital role in the evaluation of the actual or prospective success of new proposals.

First Page

267

Publication Title

Journal of Dispute Resolution

Download

Share

COinS