United States - Baker & McKenzie International Arbitration Yearbook: 2012-2013
Donald J. Hayden is a Partner in Baker & McKenzie’s Miami office. His practice involves primarily cross border disputes being resolved through litigation and arbitration. He leads Baker & McKenzie’s Dispute Resolution Group in Miami and is a member of the Steering Committee of the Firm’s Global Arbitration Group.
Ethan Berghoff is a Partner in Baker & McKenzie’s Chicago office. He represents clients in a broad range of international matters, including distributorship and supply agreements, power, fuel supply and construction contracts as well as postacquisition disputes. He has also appeared before ICC, LCIA and ICDR arbitration panels around the world.
Joseph Mamounas is an Associate in Baker & McKenzie’s Miami office. Mr. Mamounas specializes in international arbitration and other cross-border commercial disputes on behalf of multi-national U.S. and foreign clients.
A. LEGISLATION, TRENDS AND TENDENCIES
The Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”), implemented in 1925, continues as the controlling and well-established foundation for a strong national policy in favor of arbitration. In the last year, there has been no legislation that has advanced in any significant way to amend or alter the FAA or the broad acceptance of arbitration as a viable and well-accepted vehicle for resolution of both domestic and international disputes. At the state level, there are also arbitration laws in place, particularly in jurisdictions where commercial arbitration centers are located, that further encourage and promote arbitration as an acceptable mechanism for dispute resolution. In recent years, legislation to narrow the scope of the FAA has never made it through the relevant legislative committee and efforts to limit the FAA's research, often in the consumer context, have not had sufficient support. Commentators see no change in the present laws and the FAA's wide acceptance.
A. Legislation, Trends and Tendencies
A.2 Trends and Tendencies
B.1 Second Circuit Dismisses Petition to Confirm an International Arbitral Award on Grounds of Forum Non Conveniens
B.2 Eleventh Circuit Upholds District Court’s Grant of Discovery Applied for in Assistance of a Foreign Arbitration, Recognizing That an Arbitral Tribunal Is a Foreign Tribunal Qualifying for Assistance under Section 1782
B.3 Sixth Circuit Upholds District Court’s Judgment to Compel Arbitration in New Jersey in Face of Ambiguous Arbitration Clause
C. The Grant and Enforcement of Interim Measures in International Arbitration
C.1 Tribunal-Ordered Interim Measures
C.2 Court-Ordered Interim Measures
C.3 Enforcement of Interim Measures