International Commercial Arbitration

International Commercial Arbitration is an authoritative 4,250 page treatise, in three volumes, providing the most comprehensive commentary and analysis, on all aspects of the international commercial arbitration process that is available.

The Third Edition of International Commercial Arbitration has been comprehensively revised, expanded and updated,  

• To include all legislative, judicial and arbitral authorities, and other materials in the field of international arbitration prior to June 2020. 
• It also includes expanded treatment of annulment, recognition of awards, counsel ethics, arbitrator independence and impartiality and applicable law. 
• The revised 4,250 page text contains references to more than 20,000 cases, awards and other authorities and will enhance the treatise’s position as the world’s leading work on international arbitration.

The first and second editions of International Commercial Arbitration have been routinely relied on by courts and arbitral tribunals around the world ((including the highest courts of the United States, United Kingdom, Singapore, India, Hong Kong, New Zealand, Australia, the Netherlands and Canada) and international arbitral tribunals (including ICC, SIAC, LCIA, AAA, ICSID, SCC and PCA), e.g.:

U.S. Supreme Court – GE Energy Power Conversion France SAS, Corp. v. Outokumpu Stainless USA, LLC, 590 U.S. - (U.S. S.Ct. 2020); BG Group plc v. Republic of Argentina, 572 U.S. 25 (U.S. S.Ct. 2014);

Canadian Supreme Court – Uber v. Heller, 2020 SCC 16 (Canadian S.Ct.); Yugraneft Corp. v. Rexx Mgt Corp., [2010] 1 R.C.S. 649, 661 (Canadian S.Ct.);

U.K. Supreme Court – Jivraj v. Hashwani [2011] UKSC 40, ¶78 (U.K. S.Ct.); Dallah Real Estate & Tourism Holding Co. v. Ministry of Religious Affairs, Gov’t of Pakistan [2010] UKSC 46 (U.K. S.Ct.);

Swiss Federal Tribunal – Judgment of 25 September 2014, DFT 5A_165/2014 (Swiss Fed. Trib.);
 
Indian Supreme Court – Bharat Aluminium v. Kaiser Aluminium, C.A. No. 7019/2005, ¶¶138-39, 142, 148-49 (Indian S.Ct. 2012);
 
Singapore Court of Appeal – Rakna Arakshaka Lanka Ltd v. Avant Garde Maritime Servs. Ltd, [2019] 2 SLR 131 (Singapore Ct. App.); PT Perusahaan Gas Negara (Persero) TBK v. CRW Joint Operation, [2015] SGCA 30 (Singapore Ct. App.); Larsen Oil & Gas Pte Ltd v. Petroprod Ltd, [2011] SGCA 21, ¶19 (Singapore Ct. App.);

Australian Federal Court – Hancock Prospecting Pty Ltd v. Rinehart, [2017] FCAFC 170 (Australian Fed. Ct.); 

Hague Court of Appeal – Judgment of 18 February 2020, Case No. 200.197.079/01 (Hague Gerechtshof);

Arbitral Tribunals – Lao Holdings NV v. Lao People's Democratic Republic I, Award in ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/12/6, 6 August 2019; Gold Reserve Inc. v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, Decision regarding the Claimant’s and the Respondent’s Requests for Corrections, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/09/1, 15 December 2014; Total SA v. The Argentine Republic, Decision on Stay of Enforcement of the Award, ICSID Case No. ARB/04/01, 4 December 2014; Millicom Int'l Operations B.V. v. Republic of Senegal, Decision on Jurisdiction of the Arbitral Tribunal, ICSID Case No. ARB/08/20, 16 July 2010; Lemire v. Ukraine, Dissenting Opinion of Jürgen Voss, ICSID Case No. ARB/06/18, 1 March 2011.