Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

  • 7 - Judicial Interpretation of Standard Clauses

  • from Part III - Scope and Interpretation of Arbitration Clauses
  • Edited by Larry A. DiMatteo, University of Florida, Marta Infantino, Nathalie M-P Potin
  • Book:
    The Cambridge Handbook of Judicial Control of Arbitral Awards
    Published online:
    08 October 2020
    Print publication:
    29 October 2020, pp 99-118

  • Summary

    Arbitration is routinely said to be based on consent. Indeed, the consensual nature of arbitration is perhaps its most influential feature, operating both to restrict domestic court involvement in arbitral proceedings as well as limit the review of awards by national courts of law. It is also the consensual nature of arbitration, however, that justifies a domestic court’s power to review an arbitral agreement, especially when a party against whom arbitration is brought denies that it agreed to arbitrate a dispute. In essence, the argument has long been that because arbitration is based on consent, parties that have not agreed to arbitrate should not be required to do so. However, as long as only parties who have agreed to arbitrate are required to do so, there are few legitimate reasons for court involvement in the arbitral process or court review of arbitral awards. The parties agreed to arbitrate and thus should live with the consequences of that agreement.