| Summary: | Among the several reasons that contribute to the success of international commercial
arbitration is the maximization of party autonomy and the minimization of court interventions in
arbitration. This paper considers international arbitral jurisdiction in view of party autonomy and
court interventions.
The nature of international commercial arbitration involves both private consensus and public
recognition. Private consensus lies in the agreement of the parties. Problems which arise from the
agreement and concern arbitral jurisdiction are where arbitral jurisdiction comes from, whether
international arbitrators have the power to decide their own jurisdiction, to what extent international
arbitrators can assume jurisdiction and to what extent a national court should review the decisions
of the arbitrators.
The analysis is primarily based on international arbitration rules, published arbitral awards,
arbitration legislations and court decisions of countries which have a fairly developed system of
international arbitration. The paper concludes that international arbitrators are empowered to deal
with their own jurisdiction and their decision is subject only to attack at a national court.
International arbitrators and national courts should cooperate to facilitate a speedy resolution of
disputes. National laws should play the role of filling in the gaps of international arbitral jurisdiction.
Parties should frame their agreement in a way to avoid future uncertainties. === Law, Peter A. Allard School of === Graduate
|
|---|
