FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W3126589659> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W3126589659 abstract "In recent years, governments from the state of Delaware to the Emirate of Dubai have created institutions specially designed to adjudicate transnational commercial disputes. These institutions are hybrids between courts and arbitration, or “arbitral courts.” Arbitral courts seek to adapt the most popular features of arbitral tribunals and courts in order to accommodate the growing challenges of such cases.There is much to applaud about the innovation of arbitral courts. But it is important to consider what limits should cabin this innovation. Arbitral courts unsettle the traditional distinctions between public and private adjudication, and this blurring has significant consequences not only for understanding the state of the evolving international judicial system, of which U.S. courts have historically been an important part, but also for the future of legitimacy and transparency in dispute resolution around the world.Arbitral courts often claim legitimacy on grounds that combine arbitrators’ and courts’ claims to legitimacy. The legitimacy of arbitration mostly flows from parties’ consent to the arrangement, whereas courts’ legitimacy, at least those courts situated within democracies, derives more broadly from social compacts and customs, including from the democratic legitimacy of the state.Standing at the crossroads of public and private adjudication, however, arbitral courts could abuse their position by exercising jurisdiction in contexts beyond the scope of what gives them legitimacy (e.g., parties’ consent) or by closing off public access. There is a significant risk that they will do both of these things. Like arbitration centers’ rules, arbitral courts’ rules tend to be flexible. The courts often have substantial discretion over issues like whether to join third parties who have not consented to jurisdiction and whether to grant parties’ requests to keep the proceedings and decisions confidential, which tends to result in keeping proceedings secret. Exercising exorbitant jurisdiction and proceeding in secret, however, could undermine an arbitral court’s reputation for evenhandedness, its perceived legitimacy, and its potential to develop transnational law.In light of these risks, I offer two suggestions for arbitral courts looking to build their own legitimacy and to contribute to improvements in judicial institutional design. First, arbitral courts should restrict their jurisdiction in light of their hybridized source of legitimacy that draws on their resemblance to both a court and an arbitral tribunal. Second, arbitral courts should prioritize the public nature of proceedings and decisions and not defer to parties’ requests for confidentiality." @default.
• W3126589659 created "2021-02-15" @default.
• W3126589659 creator A5029003984 @default.
• W3126589659 date "2020-12-15" @default.
• W3126589659 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W3126589659 title "The Innovation and Limitations of Arbitral Courts" @default.
• W3126589659 hasPublicationYear "2020" @default.
• W3126589659 type Work @default.
• W3126589659 sameAs 3126589659 @default.
• W3126589659 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W3126589659 crossrefType "posted-content" @default.
• W3126589659 hasAuthorship W3126589659A5029003984 @default.
• W3126589659 hasConcept C11413529 @default.
• W3126589659 hasConcept C160151201 @default.
• W3126589659 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W3126589659 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W3126589659 hasConcept C204434341 @default.
• W3126589659 hasConcept C2776949292 @default.
• W3126589659 hasConcept C2779777834 @default.
• W3126589659 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W3126589659 hasConcept C46295352 @default.
• W3126589659 hasConcept C48103436 @default.
• W3126589659 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W3126589659 hasConceptScore W3126589659C11413529 @default.
• W3126589659 hasConceptScore W3126589659C160151201 @default.
• W3126589659 hasConceptScore W3126589659C17744445 @default.
• W3126589659 hasConceptScore W3126589659C199539241 @default.
• W3126589659 hasConceptScore W3126589659C204434341 @default.
• W3126589659 hasConceptScore W3126589659C2776949292 @default.
• W3126589659 hasConceptScore W3126589659C2779777834 @default.
• W3126589659 hasConceptScore W3126589659C41008148 @default.
• W3126589659 hasConceptScore W3126589659C46295352 @default.
• W3126589659 hasConceptScore W3126589659C48103436 @default.
• W3126589659 hasConceptScore W3126589659C94625758 @default.
• W3126589659 hasLocation W31265896591 @default.
• W3126589659 hasOpenAccess W3126589659 @default.
• W3126589659 hasPrimaryLocation W31265896591 @default.
• W3126589659 hasRelatedWork W159924094 @default.
• W3126589659 hasRelatedWork W2015974014 @default.
• W3126589659 hasRelatedWork W2026049473 @default.
• W3126589659 hasRelatedWork W2055428911 @default.
• W3126589659 hasRelatedWork W2118742744 @default.
• W3126589659 hasRelatedWork W2180388670 @default.
• W3126589659 hasRelatedWork W2210838979 @default.
• W3126589659 hasRelatedWork W2224031654 @default.
• W3126589659 hasRelatedWork W2494797754 @default.
• W3126589659 hasRelatedWork W2592705081 @default.
• W3126589659 hasRelatedWork W2811222761 @default.
• W3126589659 hasRelatedWork W2920136598 @default.
• W3126589659 hasRelatedWork W2980436649 @default.
• W3126589659 hasRelatedWork W300151214 @default.
• W3126589659 hasRelatedWork W3009926712 @default.
• W3126589659 hasRelatedWork W3122572767 @default.
• W3126589659 hasRelatedWork W3123975015 @default.
• W3126589659 hasRelatedWork W3135738870 @default.
• W3126589659 hasRelatedWork W3211999679 @default.
• W3126589659 hasRelatedWork W872564267 @default.
• W3126589659 isParatext "false" @default.
• W3126589659 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W3126589659 magId "3126589659" @default.
• W3126589659 workType "article" @default.