Abstract
[Extract]
Are litigation, arbitration and mediation competitive, collaborative or cooperative? Is litigation becoming an “alternative” to “alternative dispute resolution”, especially keeping arbitration on top of its game? Are mixed processes or combined regimes becoming the preference?
These questions were part of the timely and timeless theme for this year’s Taipei International Conference on Arbitration and Mediation on August 27-28, the 12th annual conference co-hosted by CAA (Chinese Arbitration Association, Taipei) and ACWH (Asian Center for WTO & International Health Law and Policy, College of Law, National Taiwan University) since 2007.
There was near-unanimous consensus among conference speakers that the tables are turning and a storm is brewing. This resonates with the “growing ecosystem” and “changing culture” as described by Eunice Chua.
Several meaningful bases of comparison and choice are emerging from the proliferation of international commercial courts and dispute resolution hubs, together with the increasing accession to the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements and the new UNCITRAL Convention on International Agreements Resulting from Mediation. They include: enforceability; efficiency (especially containment of cost and delay); expertise, availability and diversity of decision-makers; appellate review versus institutional scrutiny; transparency versus confidentiality; and flexibility versus predictability (Janet Walker, Osgood Hall Law School; Gary F. Bell, National University of Singapore). Languages and legitimacy were also raised (Ling Yang, HKIAC), which were the recurring and dominating themes of the 2016 Taipei International Conference and this year’s 2018 ICCA Congress respectively.
Are litigation, arbitration and mediation competitive, collaborative or cooperative? Is litigation becoming an “alternative” to “alternative dispute resolution”, especially keeping arbitration on top of its game? Are mixed processes or combined regimes becoming the preference?
These questions were part of the timely and timeless theme for this year’s Taipei International Conference on Arbitration and Mediation on August 27-28, the 12th annual conference co-hosted by CAA (Chinese Arbitration Association, Taipei) and ACWH (Asian Center for WTO & International Health Law and Policy, College of Law, National Taiwan University) since 2007.
There was near-unanimous consensus among conference speakers that the tables are turning and a storm is brewing. This resonates with the “growing ecosystem” and “changing culture” as described by Eunice Chua.
Several meaningful bases of comparison and choice are emerging from the proliferation of international commercial courts and dispute resolution hubs, together with the increasing accession to the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements and the new UNCITRAL Convention on International Agreements Resulting from Mediation. They include: enforceability; efficiency (especially containment of cost and delay); expertise, availability and diversity of decision-makers; appellate review versus institutional scrutiny; transparency versus confidentiality; and flexibility versus predictability (Janet Walker, Osgood Hall Law School; Gary F. Bell, National University of Singapore). Languages and legitimacy were also raised (Ling Yang, HKIAC), which were the recurring and dominating themes of the 2016 Taipei International Conference and this year’s 2018 ICCA Congress respectively.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Journal | Kluwer Arbitration Blog |
Publication status | Published - 23 Oct 2018 |