The ‘Arbitralization’ of Courts: The Role of International Commercial Arbitration in the Establishment and the Procedural Design of International Commercial Courts

IF 0.9 3区 社会学 Q2 LAW
G. Antonopoulou
{"title":"The ‘Arbitralization’ of Courts: The Role of International Commercial Arbitration in the Establishment and the Procedural Design of International Commercial Courts","authors":"G. Antonopoulou","doi":"10.1093/jnlids/idad007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n International commercial arbitration is the most preferred dispute resolution method in cross-border commercial disputes. It has been, however, claimed that arbitration has lost its flexibility by becoming increasingly formal and by incorporating litigation practices. In academic literature, this trend has been termed the ‘judicialization’ of international commercial arbitration. This article argues that while arbitration is becoming progressively judicialized, international commercial courts evidence an opposite, less studied trend; namely, the ‘arbitralization’ of courts. Through a comparative analysis of different international commercial courts, the article explores how the competition with arbitration has prompted the establishment of these courts, and how arbitration has served as the inspiration for some of their most innovative features. The article concludes that while the incorporation of arbitration features could improve court proceedings, some of international commercial courts’ arbitration features undermine procedural justice and the role of courts as public institutions and therefore hit the limits of arbitralization.","PeriodicalId":44660,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Dispute Settlement","volume":"13 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of International Dispute Settlement","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jnlids/idad007","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

International commercial arbitration is the most preferred dispute resolution method in cross-border commercial disputes. It has been, however, claimed that arbitration has lost its flexibility by becoming increasingly formal and by incorporating litigation practices. In academic literature, this trend has been termed the ‘judicialization’ of international commercial arbitration. This article argues that while arbitration is becoming progressively judicialized, international commercial courts evidence an opposite, less studied trend; namely, the ‘arbitralization’ of courts. Through a comparative analysis of different international commercial courts, the article explores how the competition with arbitration has prompted the establishment of these courts, and how arbitration has served as the inspiration for some of their most innovative features. The article concludes that while the incorporation of arbitration features could improve court proceedings, some of international commercial courts’ arbitration features undermine procedural justice and the role of courts as public institutions and therefore hit the limits of arbitralization.
法院的“仲裁化”:国际商事仲裁在国际商事法庭的设立和程序设计中的作用
国际商事仲裁是解决跨境商事纠纷的首选方式。然而,有人声称,仲裁由于日益正式和纳入诉讼做法而失去了灵活性。在学术文献中,这种趋势被称为国际商事仲裁的“司法化”。本文认为,在仲裁逐渐司法化的同时,国际商事法庭呈现出一种相反的、较少研究的趋势;即法院的“仲裁”。本文通过对不同国际商事法庭的比较分析,探讨了与仲裁的竞争如何促使这些法庭的建立,以及仲裁如何为它们的一些最具创新性的特征提供了灵感。文章的结论是,虽然仲裁特征的加入可以改善法庭程序,但国际商事法庭的一些仲裁特征破坏了程序正义和法院作为公共机构的作用,从而达到了仲裁的极限。
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
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
12.50%
发文量
24
×
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