Arbitration Fairness Act Of 2007

The contents of the June 2015 issue (Volume 124, Number 8) of the Yale Law Journal are: Article, "The New Corporate Web: Tailored Entity Partitions and Creditors' Selective Enforcement," Anthony J. Casey Note, "A Reassessment of Common Law Protections for 'Idiots,'" Michael Clemente Feature: Arbitration, Transparency, and Privatization: "Diffusing Disputes: The Public in the Private of Arbitration, the Private in Courts, and the Erasure of Rights," Judith Resnik "Arbitration and Americanization: The Paternalism of Progressive Procedural Reform," Amalia D. Kessler "Arbitration’s Counter-Narrative: The Religious Arbitration Paradigm," Michael A. Helfand "Disappearing Claims and the Erosion of Substantive Law," J. Maria Glover Feature, "Constitutional Law in an Age of Proportionality," Vicki C. Jackson Quality digital formatting includes fully linked footnotes and an active Table of Contents (including linked Contents for all individual Articles, Notes, and Essays), proper Bluebook formatting, and active URLs in footnotes. This ebook is the last issue of the academic year 2014-2015, Number 8 of Volume 124. It includes a cumulative Index for the volume.

It often seems today that no dispute is barred from resolution by arbitration. Even the fundamental question of whether a dispute falls under the exclusive jurisdiction of a judicial body may itself be arbitrable. Arbitrability is thus an elusive concept; yet a systematic study of it, as this book shows, yields innumerable guidelines and insights that are of substantial value to arbitral practice. Although the book takes the form of a collection of essays, it is designed as a comprehensive commentary on practical issues that emerge from the idea of arbitrability. Fifteen leading academics and practitioners from Europe and the United States each explore different facets of arbitrability always with a perspective open to international developments and comparative evaluation of standards. The presentation falls into two parts: in the first the focus is on the general features of arbitrability, its rationale and the laws applicable to it. In the second, arbitrability is specifically examined in the context of administrative, criminal, corporate, IP, financial, commercial, and criminal law This book has its origins in an International Conference on Arbitrability held at Athens in September 2005. Seven papers presented there are here reviewed and updated, and nine others are added. The subject of the book and– arbitrability and– is one that is much talked about, but seldom if ever given the in-depth treatment presented here. Arbitrators and other practitioners in the field will welcome the way the analysis moves logically from theory to practice regarding every issue, and academics will recognize a definitive treatment of arbitrability as understood and applied in the settlement of disputes today.

International Commercial Arbitration is an authoritative 4,250 page treatise, in three volumes, providing the most comprehensive commentary and analysis, on all aspects of the international commercial arbitration process that is available. The Third Edition of International Commercial Arbitration has been comprehensively revised, expanded and updated, To include all legislative, judicial and arbitral authorities, and other materials in the field of international arbitration prior to June 2020. It also includes expanded treatment of annulment, recognition of awards, counsel ethics, arbitrator independence and impartiality and applicable law. The revised 4,250 page text contains references to more than 20,000 cases, awards and other authorities and will enhance the treatise’s position as the world’s leading work on international arbitration. The first and second editions of International Commercial Arbitration have been routinely relied on by courts and arbitral tribunals around the world ((including the highest courts of the United States, United Kingdom, Singapore, India, Hong Kong, New Zealand, Australia, the Netherlands and Canada) and international arbitral tribunals (including ICC, SIAC, LCIA, AAA, ICSID, SCC and PCA), e.g.: U.S. Supreme Court – GE Energy Power Conversion France SAS, Corp. v. Outokumpu Stainless USA, LLC, 590 U.S. - (U.S. S.Ct. 2020); BG Group plc v. Republic of Argentina, 572 U.S. 25 (U.S. S.Ct. 2014); Canadian Supreme Court – Uber v. Heller, 2020 SCC 16 (Canadian S.Ct.); Yugraneft Corp. v. Rexx Mgt Corp., [2010] 1 R.C.S. 649, 661 (Canadian S.Ct.); U.K. Supreme Court – Jivraj v. Hashwani [2011] UKSC 40, ¶78 (U.K. S.Ct.); Dallah Real Estate & Tourism Holding Co. v. Ministry of Religious Affairs, Gov’t of Pakistan [2010] UKSC 46 (U.K. S.Ct.); Swiss Federal Tribunal – Judgment of 25 September 2014, DFT 5A_165/2014 (Swiss Fed. Trib.); Indian Supreme Court – Bharat Aluminium v. Kaiser Aluminium, C.A. No. 7019/2005, ¶¶138-39, 142, 148-49 (Indian S.Ct. 2012); Singapore Court of Appeal – Rakna Arakshaka Lanka Ltd v. Avant Garde Maritime Servs. Ltd, [2019] 2 SLR 131 (Singapore Ct. App.); PT Perusahaan Gas Negara (Persero) TBK v. CRW Joint Operation, [2015] SGCA 30 (Singapore Ct. App.); Larsen Oil & Gas Pte Ltd v. Petroprod Ltd, [2011] SGCA 21, ¶19 (Singapore Ct. App.); Australian Federal Court – Hancock Prospecting Pty Ltd v. Rinehart, [2017] FCAFC 170 (Australian Fed. Ct.); Hague Court of Appeal – Judgment of 18 February 2020, Case No. 200.197.079/01 (Hague Gerechtshof); Arbitral Tribunals – Lao Holdings NV v. Lao People's Democratic Republic I, Award in ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/12/6, 6 August 2019; Gold Reserve Inc. v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, Decision regarding the Claimant’s and the Respondent’s Requests for Corrections, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/09/1, 15 December 2014; Total SA v. The Argentine Republic, Decision on Stay of Enforcement of the Award, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/01, 4 December 2014; Millicom Int'l Operations B.V. v. Republic of Senegal, Decision on Jurisdiction of the Arbitral Tribunal, ICSID Case No. ARB/08/20, 16 July 2010; Lemire v. Ukraine, Dissenting Opinion of Jürgen Voss, ICSID Case No. ARB/06/18, 1 March 2011.