International Arbitration and Domestic Laws: A Symbiotic Interaction?

  • Gustavo Moser
Chapter
Part of the The World of Small States book series (WSS, volume 3)

Abstract

A symbiotic relationship is a biological interaction, optional or obligatory, as the case may be, where dissimilar organisms cooperate with each other to survive or improve their ‘life quality’. In such a relationship, both organisms benefit from this interaction, which could be termed a “win-win” scenario. If we take this analogy and transpose it to international arbitration and governing contract law, these questions may come to mind: how much weight is attributed to arbitration and governing contract law choices in cross-border transactions? How is this relationship nurtured? Is it nurtured at all? Is there any connection between arbitration and choice of law of which we should be aware?

References

  1. Dixit A (2003) Arbitration and Information. Working Paper, Princeton UniversityGoogle Scholar
  2. Hermalin B, Katz A, Craswell R (2007) The law and economics of contracts. In: Polinsky A, Shavell S (eds) Handbook of law and economics. Elsevier, New York, pp 3–138Google Scholar
  3. Lew QC, Julian DM (2006) Achieving the dream: autonomous arbitration. Arbitr Int 22(2):179–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Mackaay E, Rosseau S (2008) Analyse Économique du Droit. Dalloz, ParisGoogle Scholar
  5. McConnaughay PJ (1998) Risks and virtues of lawlessness: a second look at international commercial arbitration. Northwest Univ Law Rev 93:453–524Google Scholar
  6. Moser LGM (2010) Arbitragem em contratos empresariais: redução de custos e eficiência da transação. Revista de Direito Empresarial (RDE) 13:33–55Google Scholar
  7. Moser LGM (2015) Parties’ preferences in international sales contracts: an empirical analysis of the choice of law. Unif Law Rev 20(1):19–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Moser LGM (2016) Arbitration and choice of law in cross-border transactions: a potential interplay? ASA Bull 34:95–111Google Scholar
  9. Moss GC (2005) Can an arbitral tribunal disregard the choice of law made by the parties? Stockh Int Arbitr Rev 8–20Google Scholar
  10. Oppetit B (1998) Théorie de l’Arbitrage. Press Universitaires de France, ParisGoogle Scholar
  11. Park W (2010) Arbitrators and accuracy. J Int Dispute Settlement 1(1):25–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Park W (2014) The Predictability Paradox – Arbitrators and Applicable Law. Dossier of the ICC Institute of World Business Law: The Application of Substantive Law by International Arbitrators 60–70Google Scholar
  13. Perret F (2014) Resolving Conflicts between Contractual Clauses and Specific Rules of the Governing Law – Strict Application of the Law or Flexible Approach. Dossier of the ICC Institute of World Business Law: The Application of Substantive Law by International Arbitrators 109–111Google Scholar
  14. Pinsent Masons (2016) Pre-empting and Resolving Technology, Media and Telecoms Disputes; International Dispute Resolution Survey. http://www.arbitration.qmul.ac.uk/docs/189659.pdf. (Last accessed 27 July 2017)
  15. Posner R (2004) The law and economics of contract interpretation. Univ Chicago Law Econ, Olin Working Paper No. 229Google Scholar
  16. PricewaterhouseCoopers (2006) International arbitration: Corporate attitudes and practices. http://www.arbitration.qmul.ac.uk/docs/123295.pdf. (Last accessed 26 July 2017)
  17. PricewaterhouseCoopers (2008) International Arbitration: Corporate attitudes and practices. http://www.pwc.co.uk/assets/pdf/pwc-international-arbitration-2008.pdf. (Last accessed 26 July 2017)
  18. PricewaterhouseCoopers (2013) Corporate choices in International Arbitration; Industry perspectives. http://www.arbitration.qmul.ac.uk/docs/123282.pdf. (Last accessed 27 July 2017)
  19. Savare M (2004) Clauses in conflict: can an arbitration provision eviscerate a choice-of-law clause. Seton Hall Law Rev 35:597–611Google Scholar
  20. Schwartz A, Scott RE (2003) Contract theory and the limits of contract law. Yale Law J 113:540–596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Schwenzer I, Hachem P (2009) The CISG: successes and pitfalls. Am J Comp Law 57:465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Shavell S (2003) Economic analysis of contract law. Harvard Law and Economics Discussion Paper no 403Google Scholar
  23. Vogenauer S (2013) Regulatory competition through choice of contract law and choice of forum in Europe: theory and evidence. Eur Rev Priv Law 21:13–78Google Scholar
  24. White and Case (2010) International Arbitration Survey: Choices in International Arbitration. http://www.arbitration.qmul.ac.uk/docs/123290.pdf. (Last accessed 27 July 2017)
  25. White and Case (2015) International Arbitration Survey: Improvements and Innovations in International Arbitration. http://www.arbitration.qmul.ac.uk/docs/164761.pdf. (Last accessed 27 July 2017)

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gustavo Moser
    • 1
  1. 1.London Court of International ArbitrationLondonUK

Personalised recommendations