Arbitration is not an innovation

2291 Words 10 Pages
A settlement of disputes is not easy process as it seems. Since the time of Ancient Greece and Roman Empire, people had different methods of solution for conflicts. The certain part of them was cruel, barbaric, and inhumane. For instance, George Neilson (1858 – 1923), who is legal historian, explains the origin, meaning, and process of judicial duel in his book. It was a method, in which two parties in dispute had to fight in a single combat. Subsequently, the winner of this fight is declared to be right. Going back to the methods, it can be inferred that there were not only coarse solutions, but also tactful, considerate, and diplomatic ways too. Likewise, the institution similar to court was taking part in these processes. As a rule, …show more content…
The author of this paper explains both the advantages and cons of arbitration. Cases related to arbitration, and areas of arbitration are covered also. The key point of this paper is that the arbitration is considered as the best form for the settlement of disputes, especially with regard to commercial disputes and international commercial transactions, and it has a huge potential in the development, particularly in Kyrgyzstan. From the economic point of view, Arthur O’Sullivan (American economist, Professor of Economics at Lewis & Clark College) explains that arbitration is a resolution technique in which a third party reviews the evidence in the case and imposes a decision that is legally binding for both sides and enforceable. In simple words, arbitration is and alternative form for settlement of disputes with respect to court litigation. The World Intellectual Property Organization stresses that arbitration is a procedure in which a dispute is submitted, by agreement of the parties, to one or more arbitrators for a binding decision. It means that instead of going to the court, two parties choose the arbitrators, by whose decision they agree to be bound. The National Association of Consumer Advocates explains that the arbitrator decides the rules, weighs the facts and arguments of both parties, and then decides the dispute. In some sense, the arbitrator is considered as a judge in court.

More about Arbitration is not an innovation

Open Document