Submission to the Public Consultation on Proposed Amendments to the 2013 HKIAC Administered Arbitration Rules

B. Hayward
{"title":"Submission to the Public Consultation on Proposed Amendments to the 2013 HKIAC Administered Arbitration Rules","authors":"B. Hayward","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3044218","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"International commercial arbitration is renowned for its flexible procedure. But what if arbitrators could resolve disputes by simply asking themselves, 'who should win?' Would this be a fair way to resolve international commercial disputes? And would this be consistent with the commercial imperatives of parties who choose international commercial arbitration as a tool for managing their business risk? \nThis paper is a submission to the public consultation on proposed amendments to the 2013 HKIAC Administered Arbitration Rules, initially opened on 29 August 2017. It recommends amendment of the conflict of laws methodology contained in the proposed Art. 36(1) HKIAC Rules, to incorporate a closest connection test - and in doing so, addresses themes arising from the questions posed immediately above. It argues that adoption of the closest connection test in HKIAC arbitration would be consistent with key principles reflected in the HKIAC Rules 2013, and would also be in the interests of the users of HKIAC arbitration.","PeriodicalId":313622,"journal":{"name":"Transnational Litigation/Arbitration","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transnational Litigation/Arbitration","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3044218","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

International commercial arbitration is renowned for its flexible procedure. But what if arbitrators could resolve disputes by simply asking themselves, 'who should win?' Would this be a fair way to resolve international commercial disputes? And would this be consistent with the commercial imperatives of parties who choose international commercial arbitration as a tool for managing their business risk? This paper is a submission to the public consultation on proposed amendments to the 2013 HKIAC Administered Arbitration Rules, initially opened on 29 August 2017. It recommends amendment of the conflict of laws methodology contained in the proposed Art. 36(1) HKIAC Rules, to incorporate a closest connection test - and in doing so, addresses themes arising from the questions posed immediately above. It argues that adoption of the closest connection test in HKIAC arbitration would be consistent with key principles reflected in the HKIAC Rules 2013, and would also be in the interests of the users of HKIAC arbitration.
向《2013年香港国际仲裁中心管理仲裁规则》修订建议公众谘询意见书
国际商事仲裁以其灵活的程序而闻名。但是,如果仲裁者可以通过简单地问自己“谁应该赢”来解决纠纷呢?这是解决国际商业纠纷的公平方式吗?这是否与选择国际商事仲裁作为管理其商业风险工具的当事方的商业要求相一致?本文件是就《2013年香港国际仲裁中心管理仲裁规则》修订建议进行公众谘询的意见书。公众谘询于2017年8月29日展开。委员会建议修订拟议的《香港国际仲裁中心规则》第36(1)条所载的法律冲突方法,以纳入最密切联系测试,从而解决由上述问题引起的主题。它认为,在香港国际仲裁中心仲裁中采用最密切联系测试将符合《2013年香港国际仲裁中心规则》所反映的主要原则,也符合香港国际仲裁中心仲裁用户的利益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信