Encyclopedia of Law and Economics

2019 Edition
| Editors: Alain Marciano, Giovanni Battista Ramello

International Litigation and Arbitration

  • S. I. StrongEmail author
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7753-2_70

Abstract

The world of international dispute resolution has changed significantly in the last ten to fifteen years. International actors now must consider a wide array of options regarding how, when and where their legal disputes will be resolved. This entry discusses the various means of resolving international legal disputes and outlines how law and economics analysis has helped rationalize an increasingly chaotic field of law. In so doing, the discussion considers four core areas of concern: the effectiveness of international dispute resolution; competition between and within different dispute resolution mechanisms; choice of substantive and procedural law and conflict of laws; and third-party funding.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

General

  1. Arruñada B, Andonova V (2008) Common law and civil law as pro-market adaptations. Wash Univ J Law Policy 26:81–130Google Scholar
  2. Bjorklund AK (2007) Private rights and public international law: why competition among international economic law tribunals is not working. Hastings Law J 59:241–307Google Scholar
  3. Born G (2012) A new generation of international adjudication. Duke Law J 61:775–879Google Scholar
  4. Danielsen D (2011) Economic approaches to global regulation: expanding the international law and economics paradigm. J Int Bus Law 10:23–89Google Scholar
  5. Dezalay Y, Garth B (1995) Merchants of law as moral entrepreneurs: constructing international justice from the competition for transnational business disputes. Law Soc Rev 29:27–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dunoff JL, Trachtman JP (1999) Economic analysis of international law. Yale J Int Law 24:1–59Google Scholar
  7. Ginsburg T, McAdams RH (2004) Adjudicating in anarchy: an expressive theory of international dispute resolution. William Mary Law Rev 45:1229–1331Google Scholar
  8. Guzman A (2008a) How international law works: a rational choice theory. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Guzman A (2008b) International tribunals: a rational choice analysis. Univ Pa Law Rev 157:171–235Google Scholar
  10. Guzman A, Simmons BA (2002) To settle or empanel? An empirical analysis of litigation and settlement at the World Trade Organization. J Legal Stud 31:205–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kessedjian C (2005) Dispute resolution in a complex international society. Melb Univ Law Rev 29:765–808Google Scholar
  12. Ller HE (2011) The transnational law market, regulatory competition, and transnational corporations. Indiana J Glob Legal Stud 18:707–749CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Mattei U (1997) Comparative law and economics. University of Michigan Press, Ann ArborCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. McConnaughay PJ (2001) The scope of autonomy in international contracts and its relation to economic regulation and development. Columbia J Transnatl Law 39:595–656Google Scholar
  15. Michaels R, Jansen N (2006) Private law beyond the state? Europeanization, globalization, privatization. Am J Comp Law 54:843–890CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Oman N (2005) Corporations and autonomy theories of contract: a critique of the new lex mercatoria. Denver Univ Law Rev 83:101–145Google Scholar
  17. Rutledge PB (2012) Convergence and divergence in international dispute resolution. J Dispute Resol 2012:49–61Google Scholar
  18. Rühl G (2006) Methods and approaches in choice of law: an economic perspective. Berkeley J Int Law 24:801–841Google Scholar
  19. Sanchirico CW (2012) 8 Encyclopedia of law and economics: procedural law and economics. Edward Elgar, CheltenhamGoogle Scholar
  20. Shaffer GC, Pollack MA (2010) Hard vs. soft law: alternatives, complements, and antagonists in international governance. Minn Law Rev 94:706–798Google Scholar
  21. Spain A (2010) Integration matters: rethinking the architecture of international dispute resolution. Univ Pa J Int L23:1–55Google Scholar
  22. Symposium (2004) The empirical and theoretical underpinnings of the law merchant. Chic J Int Law 5:1–190Google Scholar
  23. Symposium (2012) Global public goods and the plurality of legal orders. Eur J Int Law 23(3):643–791CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Trachtman J (2008) The economic structure of international law. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MACrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Van Aaken A (2010) Trust, verify, or incentivize? Effectuating public international law regulating public goods through market mechanisms. Am Soc Int Law Proc 104:153–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Van Aaken A (2014) Behavioral international law and economics. Harv J Int Law 55Google Scholar
  27. Watt HM (2003) Choice of law in integrated and interconnected markets: a matter of political economy. Columbia J Eur Law 9:383–409Google Scholar
  28. Whytock C (2009) Myth of mess? International choice of law in action. NY Univ Law Rev 84:719–790Google Scholar

International Arbitration

  1. Benson BL (2000) Arbitration. In: Bouckaert B, De Geest G (eds) Encyclopedia of law and economics: the economics of crime and litigation. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 159–193Google Scholar
  2. Choi SJ (2003) The problem with arbitration agreements. Vanderbilt J Transnatl Law 36:1233–1240Google Scholar
  3. Cuniberti G (2009) Beyond contract – the case for default arbitration in international commercial disputes. Fordham Int’Law J 32:417–488Google Scholar
  4. Drahozal CR (2000a) Commercial norms, commercial codes, and international commercial arbitration. Vanderbilt J Transnat Law 33:79–146Google Scholar
  5. Drahozal CR (2000b) Enforcing vacated international arbitration awards: an economic approach. Am Rev Int Arb 11:451–479Google Scholar
  6. Drahozal CR (2004) Regulatory competition and the location of international arbitration proceedings. Int Rev Law Econ 24:371–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Drahozal CR (2006) Arbitration by the numbers: the state of empirical research on international commercial arbitration. Arb Int 22:291–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Franck SD (2007a) Empirically evaluating claims about investment treaty arbitration. N C Law Rev 86:1–87Google Scholar
  9. Franck SD (2007b) Foreign direct investment, investment treaty arbitration and the rule of law. McGeorge Glob Bus Develop Law J 19:337–373Google Scholar
  10. Franck SD (2009) Development and outcomes of investment treaty arbitration. Harv Int Law J 50:435–489Google Scholar
  11. Franck SD (2011) Rationalizing costs in investment treaty arbitration. Wash Univ Law Rev 88:769–852Google Scholar
  12. Guevera-Bernal I (2004) The validity of state contracts arbitration: a ‘law and economics’ perspective. Revista de la Maestría en Derecho Económico 2:7–20Google Scholar
  13. Kovacs RB (2012) Efficiency in international arbitration: an economic approach. Am Rev Int Arb 23:155–174Google Scholar
  14. O’Connor EO, Rutledge P (2014) Arbitration, the law market, and the new law of lawyering. Int Rev Law Econ 38:87–106Google Scholar
  15. Posner E (1999) Arbitration and the harmonization of international commercial law: a defense of Mitsubishi. Va J Int Law 39:647–670Google Scholar
  16. Ramsmeyer JM (2000) International dispute resolution: Law and economics. In: Hamada K et al (eds) Dreams and dilemmas: economic friction and dispute resolution in the Asia-Pacific. Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore, pp 464–477Google Scholar
  17. Rogers CA (2005) The vocation of the international arbitrator. Am Univ Int Law Rev 20:957–1020Google Scholar
  18. Rogers CA (2006) Transparency in international commercial arbitration. Univ Kans Law Rev 54:1301–1337Google Scholar
  19. Rojas Elgueta G (2011) Understanding discovery in international commercial arbitration through behavioral law and economics: a journey inside the minds of parties and arbitrators. Harv Neg Law Rev 16:165–191Google Scholar
  20. Strong SI (2009) Research and practice in international commercial arbitration: sources and strategies. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  21. Strong SI (2013) Mass procedures as a form of “regulatory arbitration” – Abaclat v. Argentine Republic and the international investment regime. J Corp Law 38:259–324Google Scholar
  22. Trakman LE (2012) The ICSID under siege. Cornell Int Law J 45:603–665Google Scholar
  23. United Kingdom Department for Business, Innovation & Skills, Analytical Framework for Assessing Costs and Benefits of Investment Protection Treaties (2013) Available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/analytical-framework-for-assessment-costs-and-benefits-of-investment-protection-treaties
  24. Van Harten G (2012) Arbitrator behaviour in asymmetrical adjudication: an empirical study of investment treaty arbitration. Osgoode Hall Law J 50:211–268Google Scholar
  25. Welsh NA, Schneider AK (2013) The thoughtful integration of mediation into bilateral investment treaty arbitration. Harv Neg Law Rev 18:71–144Google Scholar

International Litigation

  1. Barker GR (2012) Third-party litigation funding in Australia and Europe. J Law Econ Policy 8:451–524Google Scholar
  2. Bhattacharya U et al (2007) The home court advantage in international corporate litigation. J Law Econ 50:625–659CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Buxbaum HL (2006) Transnational regulatory litigation. Va J Int Law 46:251–317Google Scholar
  4. Cortés P (2013) A comparative review of offers to settle – would an emerging settlement culture pave the way for their adoption in continental Europe? Civil Justice Quart 23:42–67Google Scholar
  5. Drahozal CR, O’Connor EO (2014) Unbundling procedure. Fla L Rev 66:389–430Google Scholar
  6. Hoffman DA (2014) Whither bespoke procedure? Ill Law RevGoogle Scholar
  7. Hylton KN (2012) The economics of third-party financed litigation. J Law Econ Policy 8:701–741Google Scholar
  8. Mehra SK (2004) More is less: a law-and-economics approach to the international scope of private antitrust enforcement. Templ Law Rev 77:47–70Google Scholar
  9. Nicola FG (2008) Transatlanticisms: constitutional asymmetry and selective reception of U.S. law and economics in the formation of European private law. Cardozo J Int Comp Law 16:87–153Google Scholar
  10. Parisi F (2002) Rent-seeking through litigation: adversarial and inquisitorial systems compared. Int Rev Law Econ 22:193–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Rotem Y (2010) The problem of selective or sporadic recognition: a new economic rationale for the law of foreign country judgments. Chic J Int Law 10:505–537Google Scholar
  12. Steinitz M (2011) Whose claim is this anyway? Third-party litigation funding. Minn Law Rev 95:1268–1338Google Scholar
  13. Strong SI (2014) Limits of procedural choice of law. Brooklyn J Int Law 39Google Scholar
  14. Trachtman J (2001) Economic analysis of prescriptive jurisdiction. Va J Int Law 42:1–79Google Scholar
  15. Visscher L (2012) A law and economics view on harmonisation of procedural laws. In: Kramer XE, Rhee CH (eds) Civil litigation in a globalising world. Springer, New York, pp 65–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Missouri School of LawColumbiaUSA