The American influences on international commercial arbitration: Doctrinal developments and discovery methods

The American Influences on International Commercial Arbitration: Doctrinal Developments and Discovery Methods

Volumn , Issue , 2009, Pages 1-404

  Martinez Fraga, Pedro J ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NAVARRA   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84924655480     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511576669     Document Type: Book

References (113)

1. Francisco de Goya, Duelo a Garrotazos, circa. 1820-1823
2. Intel Corporation v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., 542 U.S. 241 (2004).
3. William Holdsworth, 12 History of English Law 519-520 (1938)
4. Paul Sayre, Development of Commercial Arbitration Law, 37 Yale L.J. 595, 606-7 (1928)
5. Zechariah, Chaffee Jr. & Sidney Post Simpson, Cases and Materials on Equity (1934)
6. Kill v. Hollister, 1 Wils. 129 (1746).
7. Creswell & Campbell, Critical Comments, in Scott v. Avery, 5 H.C.L. 811, 837-853 (1855).
8. Hamilton v. Liverpool, London & Globe Ins. Co., 136 U.S. 242 (1890).
9. Pedro J. Martinez-Fraga, The New Role of Comity in Private Procedural International Law 120 n.160 (2007)
10. Sheila Ager, Interstate Arbitration in Greece (1996)
11. Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War, Chapter XXVIII, Lines 2 to 3
12. Sturges & Murphy, Some Confusing Matters Relating To Arbitration Under the United States Arbitration Act, 17 Law and Contemp. Probs. 580 (1952)
13. Paul Sayre, Development of Commercial Arbitration Law, 37 Yale L.J. 595-597 (1927)
14. Jones, Development of Commercial Arbitration, 21Minn. L. Rev. 240, 243-244 (1927)
15. Baum & Pressman, The Enforcement of Commercial Arbitration, 8 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 238, 239-249 (1930)
16. Bucklan, Textbook of Roman Law 527-528 (1921)
17. Radin, Handbook of Roman Law 308 (1927)
18. American Safety Equipment, 391 F.2d at 826
19. Robert Lawrence Co. v. Devonshire Fabrics, Inc., 271 F.2d 402 (2d Cir. 1959)
20. American Safety Equipment, 391 F.2d at 829
21. James M. Gaitis, Unraveling the Mystery of Wilko v. Swan: American Arbitration Vacatur Law and the Accidental Demise of Party Autonomy, 7 Pepp. Disp. Resol. L.J. 1 (2007)
22. Larry J. Pittman, The Federal Arbitration Act: The Supreme Court’s Erroneous Statutory Interpretation, Stare Decisis, and a Proposal for Change, 53 Ala. L. Rev. 789 (2002)
23. F. Chet Taylor, The Arbitrability of Federal Securities Claims: Wilko’s Swan Song, 42 U. Miami L. Rev. 203 (1987)
24. Donahue v. Susquehanna Collieries Co., 160 F.2d 661 (3rd Cir. 1947)
25. Evans v. Hudson Coal Co., 165 F.2d 970 (3d Cir. 1948).
26. Marine Transit Corp. v. Dreyfus, 284 U.S. 263 (1932);
27. Kentucky River Mills v. Jackson, 206 F.2d 111 (6th Cir. 1953)
28. Campbell v. American Fabrics Co., 168 F.2d 959 (2d Cir. 1948)
29. affirmed, 300 N.Y. 586 (1949);
30. White Star Mining Co. v. Hultberg, 220 Ill. 578 (1906)
31. C. Edward Fletcher, Learning to Live with the Federal Arbitration Act: Securities Litigation in a Post-McMahon World, 37 Emory L.J. 99 (1988)
32. Stephen L. Hayford, Commercial Arbitration in the Supreme Court 1983-1995: A Sea Change, 31 Wake Forest L. Rev. 1 (1996).
33. Jennifer M. Eck, Turning Back the Clock: A Judicial Return to Caveat Emptor for U.S. Investors in Foreign Markets, 19 N.C.J. Int’l L. & Com. Reg. 313 (1994).
34. Jason Webb Yackee, Choice of Law Considerations in the Validity & Enforcement of International Forum Selection Agreements: Whose Law Applies?, 9 UCLA J. Int’l L. & For. Aff. 43 (2004).
35. Justice Jackson. The Doctrine was later developed within the context of international litigation in Piper Aircraft Co. v. Reyno, 454 U.S. 235 (1981)
36. Gary Born, International Litigation and Arbitration 341-366 (3rd ed. 1996).
37. Christine L. Davitz, U.S. Supreme Court Subordinates Enforcement of Regulatory Statutes to Enforcement of Arbitration Agreements: From The Bremen’s License to the Sky Reefer’s Edict, 30 Vand. J. Transnat’l L. 59 (1997).
38. Howard W. Schreiber, Appealability of a District Court’s Denial of a Forum- Selection Clause Dismissal Motion: An Argument Against “Cancelling Out” The Bremen, 57 Fordham L. Rev. 463 (1988).
39. Jane VanLare, From Protection to Favoritism? The Federal Policy Toward Arbitration Vis-a-Vis Competing State Policies, 11 Harv. Negotiation L. Rev. 473 (2006).
40. Graydon S. Staring, Forgotten Equity: The Enforcement of Forum Clauses, 30 J. Mar. L. & Com. 405 (1999)
41. David Marcus, The Perils of Contract Procedure: A Revised History of Forum Selection Clauses in the Federal Courts, 82 Tul. L. Rev. 973 (2008).
42. Richard L. Barnes, Rediscovering Subjectivity in Contracts: Adhesion and Unconscionability, 66 La. L. Rev. 123 (2005)
43. Leandra Lederman, Viva Zapata!: Toward a Rational System of Forum-Selection Clause Enforcement in Diversity Cases, 66 N.Y.U.L. Rev. 422 (1991)
44. Lee Goldman, My Way and the Highway: The Law and Economics of Choice of Forum Clauses in Consumer Form Contracts, 86 Nw. U.L. Rev. 700 (1992)
45. Michael Mousa Karayanni, The Public Policy Exception to the Enforcement of Forum Selection Clauses, 34 Duq. L. Rev. 1009 (1996)
46. Richard D. Freer, Erie’s Mid-Life Crisis, 63 Tul. L. Rev. 1087 (1989)
47. de Robert A., Forum Selection Clauses: Substantive or Procedural for Erie Purposes, 89 Colum. L. Rev. 1068 (1989)
48. Lisa Sopata, Mitsubishi Motors Corp. v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc.: International Arbitration and Antitrust Claims, 7 NW. J. int’l L. & Bus. 595 (1986)
49. Eric A. Posner, Arbitration and the Harmonization of International Commercial Law: A Defense of Mitsubishi, 39 Va. J. Int’l L. 647 (1999)
50. Monroe Leigh, Federal Arbitration Act - Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards - arbitrability of antitrust claims arising from an international transaction, 80 A.J.I.L. 168 (1986)
51. Jill A. Pietrowski, Enforcing International Commercial Arbitration Agreements Post-Mitsubishi v. Soler, 36 Am. U.L. Rev. 57 (1986);
52. David Westin, Foreign Plaintiffs in Products Liability Actions: The Defense of Forum Non Conveniens, 83 A.J.I.L. 438 (1989)
53. Charles H. Brower, EMERGING DILEMMAS IN INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC ARBITRATION: Mitsubishi, Investor-State Arbitration, and the Law of State Immunity, 20 Am. U. Int’l L. Rev. 907 (2005)
54. Joseph T. McLaughlin, CHOICEOF- LAW PROBLEMS IN INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION. By Horacio A. Grigera Naon, 16 Fordham Int’l L.J. 946 (1993).
55. Michael A. Scodro, Arbitrating Novel Legal Questions: A Recommendation for Reform, 105 Yale L.J. 1927 (1996);
56. J. R. Sever, Rodriguez de Quijas V. Shearson/American Express, Inc.: A Green Light to Arbitration, a Yellow Light to Investors, 64 Tul. L. Rev. 1312 (1990)
57. J. Kirkland Grant, Securities Arbitration: Is Required Arbitration Fair to Investors?, 24 New Eng.L. Rev. 389 (1989)
58. LeslieWilliam Moore, Rodriguez de Quijas v. Shearson/American Express, Inc.: Is Securities Arbitration Finally Above Suspicion?, 78 Ky. L.J. 839 (1990)
59. William C. Hermann, Arbitration of Securities Disputes: Rodriguez and New Arbitration Rules Leave Investors Holding a Mixed Bag, 65 Ind. L.J. 697 (1990)
60. Anonymous, Extra-Statutory Discovery Requirements: Violating the Twin Purposes of 28 U.S.C. Section 1782, 29 Vand. J. Transnat’l L. 117 (1996)
61. Jeffrey A. Wortman, In Search of Discovery: The Split Between the Circuits Surrounding a Threshold Discoverability Requirement to Provide Assistance Under 28 U.S.C. 1782, 30 Tex. Int’l L.J. 583 (1995)
62. Timothy M. Zabbo, EVIDENCE - NO EXTRA STATUTORY BARRIERS TO OBTAINING DISCOVERY UNDER 28 U.S.C. §1782, 29 Suffolk Transnat’l L. Rev. 147 (2005)
63. Richard D. Haygood, Euromepa v. Esmerian: The Scope of the Inquiry Into Foreign Law When Evaluating Discovery Requests Under 28 U.S.C. sec. 1782, 21 N.C.J. Int’l L. & Com. Reg. 491 (1996)
64. Nathan Reierson, OUT OF BOUNDS? APPLICABILITY OF FEDERAL DISCOVERY ORDERS UNDER 28 U.S.C. SECTION 1782 BY INTERNATIONAL ATHLETIC GOVERNING BODIES FOR USE IN INTERNAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCEDURES, 19 Loy. L.A. Ent. L.J. 631 (1999)
65. Peter Metis, INTERNATIONAL JUDICIAL ASSISTANCE: DOES 28 U.S.C. 1782 CONTAIN AN IMPLICIT DISCOVERABILITY REQUIREMENT?, 18 Fordham Int’l L.J. 332 (1994)
66. Anna Conley, A NEW WORLD OF DISCOVERY: THE RAMIFICATIONS OF TWO RECENT FEDERAL COURTS’ DECISIONS GRANTING JUDICIAL ASSISTANCE TO ARBITRAL TRIBUNALS PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. §1782, 17 Am. Rev. Int’l Arb. 45 (2006).
67. In Re: Request for Assistance from Ministry of Legal Affairs of Trinidad and Tobago, 848 F.2d 1151-1156 (11th Cir. 1988)
68. Kandy L. Parson, A remedy fashioned by an arbitrator is within the scope of the arbitrator’s authority if the remedy is rationally related to the contract and to the breach, as interpreted by the arbitrator: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. v. Intel Corp., 23 Pepp. L. Rev. 243 (1995)
69. Jessica T. Martin, Advanced Micro Devices v. Intel Corp. and Judicial Review of Commercial Arbitration Awards: When Does a Remedy “Exceed” Arbitral Powers?, 46 Hastings L.J. 1907 (1995)
70. Joseph Story, Commentaries on Equity Jurisprudence (Boston, Little Brown & Co. 1866) (9th Ed.)
71. Pedro J. Martinez-Fraga, El Arbitraje y El Proceso Global, La Justicia Norteamericana Abre Las Puertas A Los Tribunales Extranjeros, La Gaceta, May 21, 2007
72. Pedro J. Martinez-Fraga, Globalizaci´on Procesal y Arbitraje Internacional, Diario La Ley, No. 6758, July 18, 2007
73. Eric Schwartz and Alan Howard, International Arbitration Discovery Applications to Rise?, New York Law Journal, Volume 237, May 4, 2007
74. Daon Zupanec, Discovery For Use in Foreign Proceeding - “Foreign or International Tribunal” - Arbitral Body, Federal Litigator (March 2007)
75. Douglas H. Yarn and Gregory Todd Jones, Chapter 9: Arbitration, B. Prehearing Issues, Alternative Dispute Resolution: Practice and Procedure in Georgia (2007)
76. American Law Institute, Recent Developments in Domestic and International Arbitration Involving Issues of Arbitrability, Consolidation of Claims and Discovery of Non-Parties, ALI ABA Course of Study (March 7-9, 2007)
77. Tacul, S.A. v. Hartford Nat’l Bank & Trust Co., 693 F.Supp. 1399, 1400 (D.Conn. 1988)
78. In Re Civil Rogatory Letters, 640 F.Supp. 243, 244 (S.D. Tex. 1986).
79. Sam Blay, PARTY AUTONOMY IN CHINESE INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION: A COMMENT ON RECENT DEVELOPMENTS, 8 Am. Rev. Int’l Arb. 331 (1997)
80. Paul Michell, ARBITRAL & JUDICIAL DECISION: PARTY AUTONOMY AND IMPLIED CHOICE IN INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION, 14 Am. Rev. Int’l Arb. 571 (2003);
81. Anoosha Boralessa, THE LIMITATIONS OF PARTY AUTONOMY IN ICSID ARBITRATION, 15 Am. Rev. Int’l Arb. 253 (2004)
82. LOUISE ELLEN TEITZ, The Hague Choice of Court Convention: Validating Party Autonomy and Providing an Alternative to Arbitration, 53 Am. J. Comp. L. 543 (2005)
83. Mo Zhang, Contractual Choice of Law in Contracts of Adhesion and Party Autonomy, 41 Akron L. Rev. 123 (2008).
84. Oscar Chase, American “Exceptionalism” and Comparative Procedure, 50 Am. J. Comp. L. 277-294 (2002)
85. Mirjan Damaska, The Uncertain Fate of Evidentiary Transplants: Anglo-American and Continental Experiments, 45 Am. J. Comp. L. 839-844 (1997).
86. Kevin M. Clermont & Emily Sherwin, A Comparative View of Standards of Proof, 50 Am. J. Comp. L. 243 (Spring 2002)
87. Michele Taruffo, Rethinking the Standards of Proof, 51 Am. J. Comp. L. 659 (Summer 2003).
88. International Bar Association, IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Commercial Arbitration, Preamble (1999).
89. Societe Soubaigne c/societe Limmareds Akogar, Cour d’appel de Paris (March 15, 1984), Rev. arb. (1985), p. 285
90. Honeywell Bull S.A. c/Computacion Bull de Venezuela CA, Cour d’appel de Paris (June 21, 1990), Rev. arb. (1991), p. 96
91. Albert Jan van den Berg, When is an Arbitral Award Nondomestic Under the New York Convention of 1958? 6 Pace L.Rev. 25, 32-38 (1985).
92. McMahon, Implementation of the United Nations Convention on Foreign Arbitral Awards in the United States, 2 J.Mar. L. Com. 735-737 (1971)]
93. International Commercial Arbitration Under the United Nations Convention and the Amended Federal Arbitration Statute, 47 Wash. L.R. 441 (1972)
94. Gerald Aksen, American Arbitration Accession Arrives in the Age of Aquarius: United States Implements United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, 3 Sw. U. L. Rev. 1, 16 (1971)
95. Mary A. Bedikian, Alternative Dispute Resoluton, 53 Wayne L. Rev. 73 (2007)
96. Joshua Ratner and Christian Turner, Second Circuit Survey: Origin, Scope, and Irrevocability of the Manifest Disregard of the Law Doctrine, 24 Quinnipiac L. Rev. 795 (2006)
97. Jennifer J. Johnson, WALL STREET MEETS THE WILD WEST: BRINGING LAW AND ORDER TO SECURITIES ARBITRATION, 84 N.C.L. Rev. 123 (2005)
98. Jeffrey W. Stempel, Keeping Arbitrations from Becoming Kangaroo Courts, 8 Nev. L.J. 251 (2007)
99. JEFFREY R. BABBIN, ERIKA L. AMARANTE, VICTOR A. BOLDEN, GATES GARRITY-ROKOUS, Developments in the Second Circuit: 2002-2003, 36 Conn. L. Rev. 1187 (2004)
100. Hans Smit, MANIFEST DISREGARD OF THE LAW IN THE NEW YORK SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, 15 Am. Rev. Int’l Arb. 111 (2004)
101. Christopher R. Drahozal, New Experiences of International Arbitration in the United States, 54 Am. J. Comp. L. 233 (2006).
102. Mark B. Rees, HALLIGAN v. PIPER JAFFRAY: THE COLLISION BETWEEN ARBITRAL AUTONOMY AND JUDICIAL REVIEW, 8 Am. Rev. Int’l Arb. 347 (1997).
103. David Fontana, Refined Comparativism in Constitutional Law, 49 UCLA L.Rev. 539 (2001).
104. Kupferman v. Consolidated Research and Manufacturing Co., 459 F.2d 1072 (2d Cir. 1972)
105. Buckeye Check Cashing, Inc. v. Cardegna, 545 U.S. 440 (2006).
106. Ian R. Macneil, American Arbitration Law: Reformation, Nationalization, Internationalization 105-06 (1992).
107. Catherine A. Rogers, Emerging Dilemmas in International Economic Arbitration: The Vocation of the International Arbitrator, 20 Am. U. Int’l L. Rev. 957-965 (2005).
108. Id. Citing Allied-Bruce Terminix Cos. v. Dobson, 513 U.S. 265-272 (1995)
109. Georgios Petrochilos Procedural Law in International Arbitration, Oxford private International Law Series (2004).
110. International Bank, 282 F.2d 231, 233 (2d Cir. 1960)
111. Glencore Green Rotterdam B.V. v. Shivnath Rai Harnarain Co., 284 F. 3d 1114 (9th Cir. 2002).
112. In the matter of Chromalloy Aero Services and The Arab Republic of Egypt, 939 F.Supp. 907-908 (D.D.C. 1996)
113. Hilmarton v. Omniun de Traitenent et de Valorisation-OTV, 20 Y.B. Com’ Arb. 663 (1994)