• Home
  • RSS Feeds
  • Blog Archives
Subscribe to Disputing
Book an ADR Service
Call Karl Bayer
Karl Bayer's Disputing Blog - Mediator, Arbitrator, Court Master & Technical Advisor
About Karl  |  Book an ADR Service  |  Contact Karl   (214) 891-4505

Menu 
  • home
  • Mediation
  • Arbitration
  • Court Neutrals
  • Online Dispute Resolution
  • Technology
    • Intellectual Property
    • Privacy and Cybersecurity
    • E-discovery
  • Court Decisions
    • Texas Supreme Court
    • Fifth Circuit
    • Third Court of Appeals
    • U.S. Supreme Court
  • More
    • Legislation
      • Texas
      • United States
    • Healthcare
    • Guest Posts
      • John DeGroote
      • John C. Fleming
      • Rick Freeman
      • Professor Peter Friedman
      • Honorable W. Royal Furgeson, Jr.
      • James M. Gaitis
      • Laura A. Kaster
      • Professor John Lande
      • Philip J. Loree, Jr.
      • Michael McIlwrath
      • F. Peter Phillips
      • Professor Alan Scott Rau
      • Professor Thomas J. Stipanowich
      • Professor S.I. Strong
      • Richard Webb
      • Glen M. Wilkerson
    • International arbitration
    • Regulation
    • Sports and Entertainment


Legal Authorities and Comparative Law in International Commercial Arbitration

0
by Beth Graham

Wednesday, Sep 25, 2019


Tweet

S.I. Strong, Manley O. Hudson Professor of Law at the University of Missouri School of Law, has published, “Legal Authorities and Comparative Law in International Commercial Arbitration: Best Practices versus Empirically Determined Actual Practices;” 1 Ius Comparatum __ (2020 Forthcoming); University of Missouri School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2019-18.  In her journal article, Professor Strong examines the intersection of international arbitration and comparative law.

The abstract states:

For years, comparative law has been considered central to international arbitration, particularly with respect to procedural issues. Not only have inter-governmental organizations like the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law supported the view that judges and advocates should rely on international consensus when interpreting international instruments like the United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards and the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration, but advocates have traditionally been encouraged to demonstrate the propriety of certain procedural decisions by presenting judges and arbitral tribunals with comparative data culled from specialist reporters and commentary.

Although comparative analysis is generally considered a best practice in international commercial arbitration, questions arise as to whether and to what extent it constitutes an actual practice. This Article presents and analyses empirical information concerning the use of legal authorities and comparative law by judges and arbitrators, relying on data generated by a recent large-scale international survey on legal reasoning in commercial disputes. The Article also provides a wealth of practical information to judges, arbitrators, advocates and scholars seeking to improve the way that they conduct comparative legal research in international commercial arbitration. In so doing, this analysis aids understanding and development of this increasingly important area of law.

This and other scholarly works written by Professor Strong are available for download on the Social Science Research Network.

Photo by: John Lockwood on Unsplash

Related Posts

  • Armstrong v. Tygart | Tortious InterferenceArmstrong v. Tygart | Tortious Interference
  • Variations in the Uptake of and Resistance to Mediation Outside of the United StatesVariations in the Uptake of and Resistance to Mediation Outside of the United States
  • Illinois Appellate Court Holds BIPA Privacy Claims Are Not Arbitrable Under Terms of Parties’ Employment ContractIllinois Appellate Court Holds BIPA Privacy Claims Are Not Arbitrable Under Terms of Parties’ Employment Contract
  • Reviewing the Use of “Soft Law” in Investment ArbitrationReviewing the Use of “Soft Law” in Investment Arbitration
  • Designing and Implementing a State Court ODR System: From Disappointment to CelebrationDesigning and Implementing a State Court ODR System: From Disappointment to Celebration
  • Welcome Franklin Solutions Blog!Welcome Franklin Solutions Blog!

Like this article? Share it!


  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
    LinkedIn

  • Click to share on X (Opens in new window)
    X

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
    Facebook

  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
    Pinterest

  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
    Email
About Beth Graham

Beth Graham earned a Master of Arts in Information Science and Learning Technologies from the University of Missouri-Columbia, and a Juris Doctor from the University of Nebraska College of Law, where she was an Eastman Memorial Law Scholar. Beth is licensed to practice law in Texas and the District of Columbia. She is also a member of the Texas Bar College and holds CIPP/US, CIPP/E, and CIPM certifications from the International Association of Privacy Professionals.

Legal Research

Legal Research

Connect with Disputing

Visit Us On LinkedinCheck Our Feed

About Disputing

Disputing is published by Karl Bayer, a dispute resolution expert based in Austin, Texas. Articles published on Disputing aim to provide original insight and commentary around issues related to arbitration, mediation and the alternative dispute resolution industry.

To learn more about Karl and his team, or to schedule a mediation or arbitration with Karl’s live scheduling calendar, visit www.karlbayer.com.

About Disputing

Disputing is published by Karl Bayer, a dispute resolution expert based in Austin, Texas. Articles published on Disputing aim to provide original insight and commentary around issues related to arbitration, mediation and the alternative dispute resolution industry.

To learn more about Karl and his team, or to schedule a mediation or arbitration with Karl’s live scheduling calendar, visit www.karlbayer.com.

Recent Posts

We're Back!!!!
Feb 24, 2025
JAMS Welcomes Karl Bayer to its Panel of Neutrals
JAMS Welcomes Karl Bayer to its Panel of Neutrals
May 28, 2024
Class Action Waivers in Arbitration Agreements: The Twenty-First Century Arbitration Battleground and Implications for the EU Countries
Nov 27, 2023

Featured Posts

Tips on Taking Good Remote Depositions From a Veteran Court Reporter

Online Mediation May Allow Restorative Justice to Continue During COVID-19

Remote Arbitration Best Practices: Witness Examination

Search

Legal Research

Legal Research


© 2025, Karl Bayer. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy