Originally from Pro-Arbitration Revisited: A Tribute to Professor George Bermann from his Students Over the Years

Preview page

The fate of international arbitration is in the hands of states. Not only the efficacy but also the very existence of arbitration are determined by national and international laws. If agreements to arbitrate disputes and awards issued by arbitral tribunals have binding effect, it is by virtue of national and international laws conferring upon them such effect. It is also by virtue of such laws that agreements to arbitrate and arbitral awards may be enforced by domestic courts.
While national laws may be more or less “pro-arbitration”—in that they may, for instance, subject the validity of an arbitration agreement to fewer or more ample requirements, define more or less broadly the realm of arbitrable disputes, and limit more or less the grounds for appeal of an arbitral award—all laws that recognize the binding effect of arbitration agreements and arbitral awards are arbitration-friendly to the extent that they usher in an alternative to domestic litigation.

It is, however, self-evident that such arbitration-friendliness presupposes that arbitral policies and practices comply with fundamental values and principles which underlie the legal systems of states called upon to recognize arbitration as a legitimate means of dispute settlement.