A. What is International Arbitration?

1. Defining Characteristics of Commercial Arbitration

2. Special Characteristics of International Commercial Arbitration

3. Legal Framework for International Commercial Arbitration

5. International Arbitration Agreements

B. An Overview of the Advantages and Disadvantages of International

C. An Overview of Leading International Arbitration Institutions and Rules

a. International Chamber of Commerce International Court Of Arbitration

c. London Court of International Arbitration

D. An Introduction to International Treaties and Conventions Concerning International Commercial Arbitration

1. Geneva Protocol of 1923 and Geneva Convention of 1927

3. The Inter-American Convention on International Commercial Arbitration

5. Iran-United States Claims Tribunal

In addition, most developed trading nations, and many other states, have enacted legislation that permits enforcement of arbitration agreements and awards and judicial support of the arbitration process. National laws in such states recognize the capacity of parties to enter into binding agreements to arbitrate future commercial disputes, provide mechanisms for the enforcement of such arbitration agreements (through orders to stay litigation or to compel arbitration), and require the recognition and enforcement of arbitration awards. In addition, modern arbitration legislation limits the power of national courts to interfere in the arbitration process, either when proceedings are pending or in reviewing ultimate awards. In some cases, arbitration statutes permit limited judicial assistance to the arbitral process-such as selecting arbitrators and arbitral forums or enforcing a tribunal's discovery orders or provisional relief.

U.S. courts traditionally awarded nominal damages for breaches of arbitration agreements. Like English courts, American judges refused to grant specific enforcement of arbitration agreements, and permitted their revocation at any time. This grudging approach towards arbitration agreements reflected a variety of factors, including concern about private agreements "ousting" the courts of jurisdiction, skepticism about the adequacy and fairness of the Arbitral process, and suspicions that arbitration agreements were often the product of unequal bargaining power. By withholding specific enforcement, American courts substantial limited the efficacy of arbitration as a means of commercial dispute resolution.

In the United States, most important issues relating to the interpretation and enforcement of international arbitration agreements and Arbitral awards are governed primarily, but not exclusively, by federal (rather than state) law. Unfortunately, there are presently several distinct, but overlapping, sources of federal law that are potentially applicable to an international arbitration agreement or award. Similarly, although limited, the role of state law in the enforcement of international arbitration agreements is uncertain. In at least some cases, parties in U.S. courts are left with a procedural maze that is some distance removed from the promise that international arbitration provides a simple, efficient dispute-resolution mechanism. Moreover, the existence of numerous U.S. jurisdictions, with differing bodies of precedent and judicial experience with international arbitration, aggravates uncertainties.

Nevertheless, in 1975 the United States and most South American nations negotiated the Inter-American Convention on International Commercial. Arbitration, also known as the "Panama Convention." The United States ratified the Convention in 1990; other parties include Mexico, Venezuela, Columbia, Chile, Ecuador, Peru, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Panama, Paraguay and Uruguay. The Inter-American Convention is similar to the New York Convention in many respects. Among other things, it provides for the general enforceability of arbitration agreements, Arbitral awards, subject to specified exceptions similar to those in the New York Convention.

Fifth, arbitration typically involves less extensive discovery than is common in litigation in U.S. courts. This is generally attractive because of the attendant reduction in expense, delay, and disclosure of business secrets. "Of course, in particular disputes, one party may desire broad discovery rights, rather than the customarily more narrow rights available in arbitration." (infra 82)

Some common words found in the essay are:
York Convention, International Arbitration, Roach Fifth, Hunter Commercial, Arbitration Rules, Law UNCITRAL, Arbitration LCIA, Senate FAA, Arbitration Act, Commercial Arbitration, international arbitration, commercial arbitration, international commercial, arbitration agreements, international commercial arbitration, york convention, arbitral awards, national courts, arbitration agreement, arbitral institutions, agreements awards, arbitration agreements awards, international court arbitration, international arbitration agreements, conflict laws rules,
Approximate Word count = 12187
Approximate Pages = 49 (250 words per page double spaced)