Last month, the author examined U.S. judicial interpretations of primary and secondary jurisdiction considerations under the New York Convention and its U.S. enabling statute, the Federal Arbitration Act's Chapter 2, with respect to awards issued in international arbitrations. In this month's conclusion, the focus is on the effects of the laws on jurisdiction and venue over actions and proceedings falling under the Convention. See “The New York Convention: How Courts Interpret Jurisdiction on Awards—A U.S. Perspective,” 42 Alternatives 9 (January 2024) (available at https://bit.ly/3RXb3tO ).
A lternatives presents a special feature comparison of the current employment arbitration rules from four major dispute resolution providers. When using the rules, best practice is to check the latest versions for the exact current wording in the comparison categories, available at the organizations' websites listed at the top of the chart.
Alternatives to the High Cost of LitigationVolume 42, Issue 2 p. 18-36 CPR News Next Month: CPR's 2024 Annual Meeting Russ Bleemer, Russ BleemerSearch for more papers by this author Russ Bleemer, Russ BleemerSearch for more papers by this author First published: 29 January 2024 https://doi.org/10.1002/alt.22030Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onEmailFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article. Volume42, Issue2February 2024Pages 18-36 RelatedInformation
Alternatives to the High Cost of LitigationVolume 41, Issue 11 p. 166-166 CPR News Register in December for CPR's 2024 Annual Meeting in Philadelphia Russ Bleemer, Russ BleemerSearch for more papers by this author Russ Bleemer, Russ BleemerSearch for more papers by this author First published: 28 November 2023 https://doi.org/10.1002/alt.22023Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onEmailFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article. Volume41, Issue11December 2023Pages 166-166 RelatedInformation
There has been a significant body of U.S. federal case law where jurisdictional issues concerning the 1958 Convention on Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards have been litigated in the U.S. This article focuses on federal courts' interpretation on certain—not all—of those jurisdictional issues in connection with the Federal Arbitration Act—state law and state courts are out of the scope of this article.
So long as society is founded on injustice, the function of the laws will be to defend injustice. And the more unjust they are the more respectable they will seem.
A long‐running battle over a decade‐old arbitration award that, with interest, has soared to more than $11 billion against the Nigeria government appears to be nearing its end in dramatic style: The United Kingdom's High Court of Justice confirmed the reversal of the arbitration award.
Alternatives to the High Cost of LitigationVolume 42, Issue 1 p. 2-2 CPR News Alternatives on the Move Russ Bleemer, Russ BleemerSearch for more papers by this author Russ Bleemer, Russ BleemerSearch for more papers by this author First published: 26 December 2023 https://doi.org/10.1002/alt.22025Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onEmailFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article. Volume42, Issue1January 2024Pages 2-2 RelatedInformation
In Part 1 of 2, London Alternatives columnist Adam Samuel looks at typical family fights that affect family businesses—power imbalances, bad family lawyering, and all manner of bequeathment disputes. Still to come: preventing and resolving the warfare over the family business proper—which is big business for neutrals, litigators, and courts world‐wide.
Had I not participated—quite poorly—in two negotiations, several decades ago, I never would have written “Managing Conflict Mindfully: Don't Believe Everything You Think.”
On Page 167 inside, Alternatives presents a special full‐issue feature comparison of the current rules from five major administrative bodies in the international arbitration field. When using the rules, best practice is to check the latest versions for the exact current wording in the comparison categories, available at the organizations' websites listed at the top of the chart.
One of the strongest and most courageous people I have encountered in many years of mediation was an immigrant to the United States from Africa.
Last month, the authors presented an ADA case study on capacity issues, the application of the Model Standards of Conduct for Mediators, and some of the factors that limit a participant's ability to mediate. In this issue's Part 3, the focus is on bias and the need to preserve the parties' self‐determination. The first two parts of this series can be found at “Focusing on the Neutral's Role in Setting Up Americans with Disabilities Act Mediation,” 41 Alternatives 39 (March 2023) (available at https://bit.ly/3EEnWDj), and “ADA Mediation, Updated: Revisiting 30 Years of Disabilities Practice,” 41 Alternatives 19 (February 2023) (available at bit.ly/3jTICQE).
An engaged in‐house counsel is a key player on an arbitration team. Depending on the style, some may be more active and become directly involved in every step of the case. Others may prefer to work on strategic issues and leave the execution of tasks for external counsels. But in no circumstances should the in‐house counsel be absent or distant from the arbitration proceeding and the external team.
Into its fourth decade, the Americans with Disabilities Act has taken its place alongside the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as a successful step in addressing discriminatory conduct in the United States. The law prohibits discrimination in hiring and on the job, in governmental and public activities, transportation, at public accommodations like hotels, restaurants, and theaters, and ensures access to telecommunications systems for speech and hearing impaired individuals.
Last month, author John Burritt McArthur presented the first three points on a list of 10 reasons why FINRA arbitrations offer a great experience for new and veteran neutrals alike. In Part 1—Ten Reasons for Serving as a FINRA Arbitrator, 40 Alternatives 171 (December 2022) (available at bit.ly/3iFB8zs)—he dispelled myths and stereotypes in reviewing why arbitrating FINRA cases is a good thing to do, how FINRA arbitration opens a pathway into the arbitrator profession, and how it can lead to early chair experience. This month, he discusses seven other benefits of serving as a FINRA arbitrator.
In last month's Part 1 (see link below), London author/mediator/attorney Rhys Clift provided background on technological changes preceding the global pandemic, and how they combined to affect alternative dispute resolution processes. This month, he continues on how and why Covid‐19 changed business mediation even more, and why these changes are now a permanent part of the dispute resolution landscape.
The world of arbitration teaching is currently awash with concerns about artificial intelligence and its effect on students, teachers, research, and lawyers and other dispute resolution professionals. A world where students no longer attend class because they can do their assignments by searching ChatGPT strikes fear into the heart of lecturers.
On Sept. 24, 2023, please raise a glass to celebrate the centenary of the first truly international multilateral treaty on arbitration.
