International arbitration

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

International arbitration is a proceeding in which two public or private entities refer their differences to one or more selected persons (usually an odd number), who issue a binding decision. The parties have usually selected earlier the applicable law.

Contents 1 Differences 2 Civil Arbitration 3 Permanent Court of Arbitration 4 See also

[edit] Differences

Arbitration, unlike Mediation, is a judicial act, whereas Mediation involves merely non-binding suggestions made by the chosen mediator.

[edit] Civil Arbitration

In civil arbitration, decisions or awards may be made a rule of court, after which it becomes enforceable by writ of execution against person or property.

An international award originating from a contracting state must be enforced by other countries who signed the New York Convention of 1958. This convention has been ratified by all major commercial nations. An international award therefore has the same, if not greater, executory force than a domestic decision.

The obligation of an ordinary treaty rests on precisely the same foundations. Where there are two or any even number of arbitrators, provision is usually made for umpire (French sur-arbitre). The umpire may be chosen by arbitrators themselves or nominated by a neutral power. The Alabama arbitration nominated the president of the United States, the British queen, the king of Italy, the president of the Swiss Confederation, and the peror of Brazil respectively.

In the Bering Sea, seven arbitrators, two nominated by Great Britain, by the United States, and the remaining three by the president of the French Republic, the king of Italy (1905), and the king of Sweden and Norway respectively. In neither of these cases are there an umpire; nor was any necessary, since the decision was unanimous.

[edit] Permanent Court of Arbitration

Permanent Court of Arbitration (Cour Permanente d'Arbitrage): The establishment of a permanent tribunal at The Hague, pursuant to the Peace convention of 1899, marks a momentous epoch in the history of international arbitration. This tribunal realized an idea put forward by Jeremy towards the close of the 18th century, advocated by Mill in the middle of the 19th century, and worked out by Mr Dudley Field in America, by Dr Goldschmidt in Germany, and by Sir Edmund Hornby and Mr Leone Levi in England.

The arbitration before the Hague court was more portent than the first, not only because so many of the great wars were concerned in it, but also because it brought out the discontinuance of acts of war. The facts may be stated shortly thus. By three several protocols signed by Washington in February 1903, it was agreed that Italy shall retain claims by Great Britain, Germany. Italy, on versus half of their respective subjects against the Venezuelan government should be referred to three mixed commissions, that for the purpose of securing the payment of these claims. Percentage of the customs revenues at the ports of La Guayra and Puerto Iballo should be remitted in monthly instalments to the representative of the Bank of England at Caracas.

Prior to the date of these protocols, an attempt had been made by Great Britain, Germany and Italy to enforce their claims by blockade, and a question arose as between these three powers on the one end, and the United States, France, Spain, Belgium, Netherlands, Sweden, Norway and Mexico on the other end. By three protocols signed in May 1900, no arbitrator was to be a subject or citizen of any of the signatory or creditor powers.

[edit] See also

• Arbitration
• Arbitration award
• London Court of International Arbitration

This article incorporates text from the Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition, a publication now in the public domain.