Originally from the ICDR Handbook on International Arbitration Practice - Second Edition

Preview Page

I.    Introduction

It is generally accepted that international arbitration is the best method of dispute resolution when parties in a commercial relationship are from different countries. In the event of a commercial dispute with international dimensions, the lack of a binding arbitration clause leaves the parties with no option but to resort to the courts of a country with which one or both of them are unfamiliar and uncomfortable. Having an arbitration clause in place at the commencement of the commercial relationship gives the parties more control over how their dispute will be resolved.

It is also generally accepted that international arbitration should be conducted under the auspices of an administrative body, instead of being “ad hoc.” This article discusses the considerations involved in deciding on the institution to administer the dispute, and whether national and regional centers can reasonably be considered.

II.    Preference for Established Institutions

The general preference of international business is to have the dispute administered by an established international arbitral institution, such as the International Center for Dispute Resolution (ICDR), the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA), or the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (SCC).