Law Commons^™

Who Owes How Much? Developments In Apportionment And Joint And Several Liability Under O.C.G.A. § 51-12-33, Thomas A. Eaton

Scholarly Works

Without question, O.C.G.A. 51-12-13 as construed in McReynolds and Couch ushers in a new era in Georgia tort law. It topples the old regime in which multiple tortfeasors were held jointly liable when their combined acts of negligence injured an innocent plaintiff. The new regime is one of apportionment and liability limited to one's personal share of fault. Fault may be apportioned when it previously could not. It may be apportioned to those who are immune, to those who are unknown, and even to those who intentionally injure an innocent plaintiff. The practical consequence of this regime change is to …

Trips And Bits: An Essay On Compulsory Licenses, Expropriation, And International Arbitration, Peter B. Rutledge

Scholarly Works

This essay examines the potential for arbitration to resolve disputes between private companies and developing countries over the propriety of compulsory licenses. At bottom, my thesis is that arbitration supplies the medium through which to mediate the tension between the profit-seeking goals of private multinational companies and the development goals of foreign nations, especially in the developing world. The compulsory license debate raises a clash of fundamental interests between the patent holder, the patent holder’s state, and the host state. Arbitration can play an important role in balancing those interests, albeit a highly unusual one. Arbitration provides an essential forum …

Penalty Clauses And The Cisg, Jack Graves

Scholarly Works

Commercial agreements often provide for “fixed sums” payable upon a specified breach. Such agreements are generally enforced in civil law jurisdictions. In contrast, the common law distinguishes between “liquidated damages” and “penalty” clauses, enforcing the former, while invalidating the latter as a penalty. The UN Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) does not directly address the payment of “fixed sums” as damages, and the validity of “penalty” clauses has, traditionally, been relegated to otherwise applicable domestic national law under CISG Article 4. This traditional orthodoxy has recently been challenged—suggesting that the fate of a penalty clause …

Court Litigation Over Arbitration Agreements: Is It Time For A New Default Rule?, Jack Graves

Scholarly Works

Court litigation over the existence or validity of arbitration agreements is a major threat to the efficacy of international commercial arbitration. While New York Convention Article II(3) requires a court to “refer the parties to arbitration” when faced with a valid and effective arbitration agreement, it fails to provide any guidance with respect to the process for answering that question, thus leaving the issue to national law. A recalcitrant respondent may, therefore, have a variety of options for court challenges—based on a disparate array of national laws—in seeking to delay or at least complicate any claims subject to arbitration. This …

Court Litigation Over Arbitration Agreements: Is It Time For A New Default Rule?, Jack Graves

Scholarly Works

Court litigation over the existence or validity of arbitration agreements is a major threat to the efficacy of international commercial arbitration. While New York Convention Article II(3) requires a court to “refer the parties to arbitration” when faced with a valid and effective arbitration agreement, it fails to provide any guidance with respect to the process for answering that question, thus leaving the issue to national law. A recalcitrant respondent may, therefore, have a variety of options for court challenges—based on a disparate array of national laws—in seeking to delay or at least complicate any claims subject to arbitration. This …

Mandatory Binding Arbitration Clauses Prevent Consumers From Presenting Procedurally Difficult Claims, Jean R. Sternlight

Scholarly Works

The longstanding debate over the benefits and detriments of mandatory arbitration in the consumer context has often focused on the wrong issue. Although we have now argued for almost twenty years over whether it is appropriate to require consumers to arbitrate rather than litigate claims against providers of products and services, too often commentators have asked whether consumers win or lose when they bring claims in arbitration, rather than whether consumers’ claims are suppressed or eliminated altogether as a result of companies’ use of mandatory arbitration clauses. The United States Supreme Court’s recent decision in AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion brings …

Tainted Love: An Increasingly Odd Arbitral Infatuation In Derogation Of Sound And Consistent Jurisprudence, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Convergence And Divergence In International Dispute Resolution Symposium, Peter B. Rutledge

Scholarly Works

Drawing on the literature, two strands help to frame this paper. The first concerns why parties choose to arbitrate. The second strand is the literature documenting the efforts within the arbitration industry to encourage the use of arbitraments.

My goal in this paper is to bridge a gap between this second strand and the first, more theoretical strand. What is missing from both strands is a concrete, system-wide understanding about why parties opt for arbitration as opposed to other forms of dispute resolution. In other words, I seek both to give concrete understanding to the theoretical model articulated in the …