Published 2009-09-02
Keywords
- maritime arbitration,
- International Arbitration Act 1974,
- New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards,
- UNCITRAL,
- arbitration clause
- Admiralty Act 1988 (Cth),
- arbitral award,
- security,
- anti-suit injunction,
- arbitration agreement,
- anti-anti-suit injunction,
- private international law,
- alternative dispute resolution,
- UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration ...More
Abstract
As Justice Rares explains in his article, the New York Convention and Model Law are vital servants of international trade and commerce. About 12 per cent of the world’s trade by volume is carried into and
out of Australia by sea. New Zealand too has a long history of international sea trade. Both countries must develop and support efficient, skilled and
internationally acceptable arbitrators who can bring their commercial abilities to bear in resolving disputes. With so much of world trade focused in the Asia-Pacific region, the need for Australia to develop a reputation as a centre for arbitrations is manifest. Australia and New Zealand have a very long history of impartial, independent and incorruptible courts with a well regarded jurisprudence. These are capable of
providing, and do in fact provide, support to the conduct of international arbitrations.
This article serves as something of a companion piece to Hugh Williams' paper, also delivered at the 2009 Conference. Rares focuses on the granting of anti-suit injunctions in Australian cases relating to arbitration as compared with the granting of anti-suit injunctions in Europe.