World Arbitration And Mediation Review (WAMR) - 2007 Volume 1 No. 2
About the Editors:
Thomas E. Carbonneau holds the Samuel P. Orlando Distinguished Professorship at Penn State Law and directs The Penn State Institute on Arbitration Law and Practice. In his thirty-year career in law teaching, he has taught law and arbitration at Tulane University, Fordham, McGill, University of Denver, Hamline Dispute Resolution Institute, and University of California at Davis. He is a former Editor-in-Chief of the World Arbitration and Mediation Report and is the author of nearly twenty books and numerous articles on law and arbitration. He is the faculty adviser for the Penn State Yearbook on Arbitration and Mediation and its Vis Moot Court team.
Richard Chernick is Managing Director of JAMS’ National Arbitration Practice. Mr. Chernick has conducted hundreds of large and complex arbitrations and mediations employing various rules and before all major administering institutions, both nationally and internationally. He is Past Chair of the Dispute Resolution Section of the American Bar Association (ABA); Founding President of the College of Commercial Arbitrators (CCA); Founding Chair of the ADR Committee of the State Bar of California; Advisor to the ABA’s drafting committee for the Revised Uniform Arbitration; Past President of the Los Angeles County Bar Association, the Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles, and past Chairman of the Board of Dispute Resolution Services, Inc., the dispute resolution program of the Los Angeles County Bar Association. Mr. Chernick was a Partner with Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher (1977-1994) where he specialized in commercial litigation and domestic and international arbitration.
Robert B. Davidson, Esq. is a full-time arbitrator and mediator, and the Executive Director of JAMS Arbitration Practice. He has sat in over 150 domestic and international arbitrations as sole arbitrator and as a member of tripartite panels in both institutional and ad hoc settings. Cases arbitrated have involved complex commercial and financial business issues, including contract actions, disputes under APA and SPA agreements, construction, insurance and reinsurance claims, oil and gas disputes, securities, tax, construction, real estate, intellectual property, employment disputes, and sports matters.
Mary Helen Mourra is former Executive Director of the Institute for Arbitration Law and Practice, Pennsylvania State University, Dickinson School of Law. She is the Editor-in-Chief of the Latin American Arbitration Review, and Managing Legal Editor of the Stockholm International Arbitration Review. She is also the principal author of Latin American Investment Treaty Arbitration: The Controversies and Conflicts and Co-editor of the Practitioner’s Handbook on Middle East and North African Arbitration. She has extensive work experience in and ties to the Middle East and Latin America. She was Counsel to the Hariri Foundation in matters before the United Nations from 2000 to 2005. Her professional experience has included consulting on international law and representing NGOs before the United Nations in New York and Geneva, Switzerland. She was Co-counsel with Professor John Quigley of Ohio State University School of Law in a number of international cases. She received her Juris Doctorate from Tulane University. She speaks English, French, Spanish, Arabic, and Creole and she is member of the Maryland Bar.
Originally from World Arbitration And Mediation Review (WAMR)
I. INTRODUCTION: LATIN AMERICAN ARBITRATION
By Mary Helen Mourra∗
In the 1990s, after more than one hundred years of resistance and
hostility to international arbitration, Latin American countries rapidly began
to ratify the relevant conventions on international commercial arbitration
and the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. Today, all
Latin American countries are parties to the United Nations Convention on
the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards of 1958 (the
New York Arbitration Convention) and the Inter-American Convention on
International Commercial Arbitration (the Panama Convention). Most have
signed the International Convention on the Settlement of Investment
Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States (the ICSID
Convention).1 Most either amended old arbitration laws or adopted new
arbitration laws that reflect modern international standards recognizing
arbitration as a valid and enforceable mechanism of dispute resolution for
international commercial disputes.
The dramatic reversal in Latin America’s receptiveness to international
arbitration is probably best explained by a combination of factors. The
factors to which the change is most frequently attributed are the
overwhelming exigencies that globalization has placed on all States that
wish to compete in the world economy and the need to facilitate
international trade with a neutral forum for dispute resolution. While those
factors have played a powerful role in bringing about legislative changes in
countries across the world, other equally influential factors played a central
role in pushing Latin America into the arena. Since its independence, Latin
America has relied heavily on foreign capital to finance its development.
While foreign capital has helped foster development in Latin America, it has
frequently burdened it with foreign debt. The relationship between Latin
American countries and foreign capital sources may explain, at least in part,
the reason for the one hundred years of hostility toward arbitration as well as
the recent and sudden change of attitude.
Introduction: Latin American Arbitration
Mary Helen Mourra, Esq.
Events in Arbitration and ADR