Law Commons^™

International Commercial Arbitration: The Contribution Of The French Jurisprudence, Arthur Taylor Von Mehren

Louisiana Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Exuberant Pathway To Quixotic Internationalism: Assessing The Folly Of Mitsubishi, Thomas E. Carbonneau

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

By holding that antitrust claims are arbitrable, the United States Supreme Court may have wanted to minimize, if not eliminate, the possibility that dilatory practices could thwart the international arbitral process. Faced with a potentially ruinous contractual relationship and the prospect of arbitration, a disgruntled party (like Soler) might find that it has no other remedy than postponing the day of reckoning. Raising the possibility that the entire transaction is illicit because of antitrust violations at least generates delay and might undermine the arbitration, staving off the possibility of resolution.

The Uncitral Model Law On International Commercial Arbitration, Saturnino E. Lucio

University of Miami Inter-American Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Exuberant Pathway To Quixiotic Internationalism: Assessing The Folly Of Mitsubishi, Thomas E. Carbonneau

Journal Articles

The writing on international commercial arbitration often is replete with statements affirming the necessity and advocating the progression of the institution. Indeed, the transnational consensus on commercial arbitration is exceptional - a rare example of viable cohesion in the fragmented arena of international affairs. The unifying spirit of the 1958 New York Arbitration Convention, the uniformity of approach among national courts to the implementation of the Convention, and national legislation supportive of the emerging international consensus on arbitration attest to a willingness to eradicate parochial concerns, to respond to felt needs, and to achieve functional international cooperation.

The United States …

The Iran-United States Claims Tribunal 1981-1983, Lori Fisler Damrosch

Faculty Scholarship

It is in the nature of publishing schedules that this volume of papers presented at a colloquium in April of 1983 was printed in 1984, distributed in 1985, and reviewed in an issue to appear in early 1986. Those who have actively followed the work of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal are necessarily familiar with a large portion of the contents of this book. Not only were three of the seven chapters previously published elsewhere, but much of the descriptive and some of the analytical material throughout the book has been dealt with in a more timely fashion in the …