• Search

Editorial

2017's hearing centre news

05 December 2017

ASIA

Whitelist / Institutions Worth a Closer Look – Latin America & the Caribbean

19 November 2017

With Latin America, it’s not so much if one will be asked to accept a local arbitral provider as when. And then which one.

Whitelist / Institutions Worth a Closer Look – Special Occasions

17 November 2017

Not all “specialist” institutions specialise in a region. Some specialise in a sector or a particularly technical subject matter. It’s this type of body we mean by “special occasions”. The “occasion” in question may be a finance or an IP dispute, or one connected with a particular trade or activity – shipping, direct foreign investment or sport. Or something even more specific, such as German–Chinese trade.

Whitelist / Institutions Worth a Closer Look – Western Europe

17 November 2017

Western Europe is home to the two A-list arbitration providers in the world, the ICC and the LCIA. Neither needs much in the way of introduction.

White List / Institutions Worth a Closer Look – North America

17 November 2017

The US is home to the mighty American Arbitration Association (AAA), which grew from a demand for domestic commercial arbitration. When it started to seek an international name, the AAA hit some obstacles. One was its name, which didn’t sound very neutral, and led it to adopt a different persona – the ICDR – for foreign-related work.

Whitelist / Institutions Worth a Closer Look – Middle East & Africa

17 November 2017

In 1997, Judge Charles Brower published a piece in The American Journal of International Law describing the “three phases” of arbitration in the Middle East.

Whitelist / Institutions Worth a Closer Look – Eastern Europe

17 November 2017

For such a big area, eastern and central Europe is home to few tried and tested local arbitration providers. But there are reasons for this.

Whitelist / Institutions Worth a Closer Look – Asia/Asia Pacific

17 November 2017

If regional arbitration has a home, it is in Asia. More specifically, in Hong Kong. The growth of Hong Kong’s arbitration centre proved: if you give users a dependable local option, the some of them will come, especially if it saves long haul travel. The HKIAC’s success inspired any number of others (hence this book).

Survey results

17 November 2017

The data for this survey was gathered between 2013 and 2015, when counsel and arbitrators completed detailed questionnaires on their hearing centre preferences. This survey was itself informed by an early iteration identifying what users valued in hearing centres, and the order in which they prioritised them. The following article blends the new and older research.

Welcome to GAR’s guide to regional arbitration

17 November 2017

Why a guide to less well-known institutions? It’s a good question. After all, it’s not like there’s mass dissatisfaction with the existing, older arbitral institutions, or an appetite for experimentation among global corporations when it comes to their disputes. So why put together a book that largely ignores them in favour of less sure-fire options? One simple reason: those options exist. And if they exist you can’t ignore them, because, inevitably, some will be suggested. And some, as the Hong Kong International Arbitration Center (HKIAC), the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) and others show, will become players. And new ones will – at least in the near term – continue to come along.