Why Is Severability Such An Important Principle In Arbitration - Assignment Example

Student Name: Topic: Course: Tutor: Department: Institution: Date Due: PART 1 Question 1 Why is severability such an important principle in arbitration? The doctrine of severability ensures the continued exercise of jurisdiction by an arbitration institution over a case where one is party objects to such jurisdiction on the grounds that the main contract was terminated or is invalid. The validity issue of the arbitration clause contained in a contract is separately treated from the validity issue of the contract itself. For example whilst a case may be accepted on the basis of valid arbitration clause subsumed within a contract, the arbitral tribunal may subsequently render an award that declares the contract itself to be invalid (Alan, 2004). In China, the supreme people’s court has affirmed the Severability of a settlement clause subsumed within an agreement, irrespective of the nature of that contract, or indeed its validity or otherwise. This is repeated in the Article 10 of the Spc Judicial Interpretation 2006, which states that where a contract has not been cancelled after its formation, the principle of severability shall apply to the recognition of the validity of the arbitration agreement. And further, if the concerned parties have arrived at a mediation settlement at the conclusion of a contract, the non-formation of such contract shall have no effect on the legality of the agreement. In1999. The Beijing Higher People’s Court considered how the effectiveness of a mediation agreement would be adversely affected in circumstances where it is determined that the principal contract has failed to come into effect. The court pointed out the independence and severability of the arbitration clause, effectively confirming its existence as a separate agreement. The principal stated that the terms and conditions of the principal contact do not affect an arbitration agreement. The Beijing Higher People’s Court also considered the efficacy of the mediation contract within the body of a contract found to have been executed under duress. The court again emphasized the independence and severability of an arbitration agreement in the underlying contract in which it is contained. In case of lack of evidence that the settlement agreement itself was executed under duress, the arbitration accord will be rendered an authentic record of the purpose of the parties to arbitrate stated disputes. The invalidity of an underlying principle contract will have no deportment on the validity or otherwise of the arbitration agreement (Arnold, 1984). Question 2 The selection of a seat is the most important clause in any arbitration clause. Discuss The most important variable in a 1-025 international arbitration clause is the sitting place of arbitration. It is the municipality to which the mediation is legally attached. Choosing the place of arbitration brings with it at least three major legal consequences. 1. It determines, at least in traditional thinking, which municipal law should govern the arbitration (by ‘law governing arbitration’ or ‘law of the arbitration’ we mean the law overriding the procedure to be followed, not the law governing the substance of dispute) 2. The place of arbitration determines the court to supervise and support –or in some cases, interfere with and obstruct – the arbitration, and this includes which courts hear an action to put aside the award; 3. The place of arbitration is determinant of the award nationality which is important for enforcement purposes. If the parties decide on a place of arbitration that is non friendly to the arbitration, there is plenty of scope for a delinquent party to derail any arbitration held there, or to have the courts of that place set aside a resulting award, leading the arbitration clause to be effectively worthless. The law and courts of the arbitral seat play a unique and critical role in the international arbitral process under the Convention and national arbitral legislation. The selection of seat is vital since this determines the national law overriding the proceedings. In case the arbitration is unsuccessful the seat will oversee the legal system and court that the parties will make use of to settle any dispute. The number of arbitrators, generally one or three is compulsory designation by the clause. The clause may also give for the procedure for selection and appointment of the arbitrators and all mandatory qualifications. The qualifications should be a bit lenient; otherwise it is possible to run out of finding an arbitrator who meets all the required qualifications. The language of the arbitration is a more important part of the designation which includes the language in which the arbitrators will speak, hearings will be conducted in, and language the request for settlement and other pleadings will be in print (Erick, Herman, & Christopher, 2005). Question 3 Mr. Schmidt will be successful because the terms of contract are clearly specified in the specific provisions set by the ICC Singapore. The contract outlines the mandatory requirements in the transactions and the actions to be taken in case one party breached the contract. The ICC is a non-profit, private association composed of the prominent members of the business communities with an objective to create an institution that would foster reconciliation and peace through the promotion of international commerce. To achieve this objective, the ICC recognizes the need for gradual synchronization of international trade practices; legislation and the development commercial instruments and mechanisms that are acknowledged internationally, this also include mechanisms for the resolution of international commercial disagreements. Dispute settlement under the ICC Rules of Arbitration is an official modus operandi leading to a necessary decision from a neutral arbitral tribunal, liable to enforcement pursuant to both domestic arbitration laws and global treaties like the New York Convention (Genzberger, 1994). ADR (amicable dispute resolution) under the ICC ADR Rules aims to facilitate a negotiated settlement with the assistance of an independent neutral. The acceptable procedure under the ADR Rules is arbitration, but the requirements also include pacification, neutral assessment and a variety of combinations of these and other techniques. ICC's major role is trade facilitation that centers primarily on development in the efficiency of the procedures associated with international trade. To achieve on this, ICC has adopted an all-inclusive and incorporated process to shorten and reduce the expenses of International trade business, and make certain that all applicable activities occur in a competent, clear, and conventional approach, based on globally accepted standards. On top of civilizing customs procedures ICC also focuses on diversified controls being applied at national borders by different authorities. ICC's aimed at promoting the setting up a trade facilitation accord that is profitable to WTO Members. The contract between Mr. Jones and Mr.Schimdt, whether written or verbal shall be presided over and construed in harmony with the laws of Singapore (The World Business, 2011). The contract and all its subsequent variations shall be focused to, overseen by and construed in agreement with the laws of Singapore for every resolution. The legal provisions must be unbiased; objective based and does not undermine the efficiency and reliability of traders and transport or impose unwanted expenses to the parties. This being the case, Mr.Schimdt has a strong ground to argue his case and win against Mr. Jones for breach of the agreement. Any form of agreement as a result of the contract, as well as any questions regarding its being and legality shall be referred to and finally resolute by arbitration in Singapore in accordance with the Arbitration Rules of the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC Rules) for the time in force (The World Business, 2011). For the time being in power, the dispute is presented to the Singapore Mediation Centre for resolution by arbitration in accordance with the Mediation Procedure of the Singapore Mediation Centre. The parties must accept to take part in the mediation and abide by the terms of any reached decision or will be thought to be in breach of agreement (The World Business, 2011). As a rule, parties should also always make sure that the mediation agreement is: A written document - The efficacy of an arbitration clause first of all be contingent on the indication of its presence. It should therefore be a written document (The World Business, 2011). Carefully drafted – On a continuous base, the requests for arbitration are received by the Court based on equivocal mediation clauses. Articles expressed wrongly, slightly, cause postponement. The bad result would be hindering the mediation process. Therefore, argument by Mr. Jones that he did not sign the contract is not substantial since a trade agreement and a contract with Mr.Schimdt exists. It is clear that the contract had an arbitration clause to allow for the cross border movement of goods. Moreover, the ICC has experts as arbitrators and therefore, Mr. Jones argument that the tribunal is not competent is not valid to support his cause. In case of any row or disagreement concerning the agreement, no party shall continue to dispute except when levelheaded efforts to determine the same through mediation in accordance with the Mediation Procedure of The Singapore have been made by the parties. From the case between, Mr. Jones and Mr.Schimdt, there is no indication of any mediation and therefore, the case will not be successful at the ICC tribunal. On the competency of the ICC tribunal, Mr. Jones is wrong because all the arbitrators are obliged to the following requirements; Each judge must be independent and autonomous of the arbitration involved parties. A potential judge shall sign an account of acceptance, availability, impartiality and independence before nomination or confirmation. Any facts or circumstances which might lead to the questioning of the arbitrator’s independence before the parties plus any conditions that could cause doubts about the arbitrator’s impartiality, the prospective arbitrator shall disclose in writing to the Secretariat within a specific time. The Secretariat shall avail such information to the parties in writing and set a time limit for any comments from them (The World Business, 2011). The judge shall immediately reveal in writing to the Secretariat and to the parties all facts or positions similar to those referred to in Article 11(2) concerning the arbitrator’s impartiality or independence which may result in the arbitration (The World Business, 2011). The decisions made by the Court for the nomination, authorization, trial or replacement of a judge shall be compulsory and final, and the reasons for such decisions shall not be communicated. By accepting to serve, arbitrators commence to carry out their responsibilities in agreement with the Rules. As long as the parties have not provided otherwise, the arbitral tribunal shall be constituted in accordance with the requirements of Articles 12 and 13 (The World Business, 2011). Therefore Mr.Schimdt will be successful in his case because the defense put by Mr. Jones is not valid and the ICC tribunal is competent, impartial and has experts to arbitrate on matters involving cross-border trade. Question 4 Section 8 (1) and 2 International Arbitration act 1974 (Cth) implemer New York Convention, provide that a foreign award is obligatory for all purpose on the parties in the contract may be prescribed in a court of a state or territory as though the award had been prepared in that State or territory in agreement with the rule of that State or region. Section 3 clarifies a foreign award as an arbitral grant made in a country another country and not Australia. If the award is made in a non-convention country, the provisions for enforcement do not apply unless the person seeking administration is domiciled or ordinary inhabitant in Australia or a convention country. Section 8 (5) of the international Act 1974 set out the defense to an action for enforcement which are for the most part materiel identical to the grounds for setting aside an award provided in Article 34 of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Model Law. The only additional ground is that the award is not yet obligatory on the parties of the mediation agreement or has been deferred by a skilled authority of the country or under the law in which, the award was made. This ground states the obvious precondition for enforcement, namely that there must be a valid and operative award. Section 8 (2) states that a overseas award may be imposed as if made in the sates or Territory, the procedure for enforcement is governed by the relevant local law. The relevant position in New South Wales is section 33 (1) in the Convention Arbitration Act 1984 which provides that an award through mediation agreement may, by consent of the court, be prescribed in the same manner as a judge or command of the law court to the same consequence, and where consent is given, judgment may be done in relation to the award. There is no need to obtain a judgment on the award, but it is prudent when command to administer is granted, to have verdict entered in terms of the grant because a formal verdict is necessary for certain statutory purposes such as the obtaining of a bankrupcy or the subsequent enforcement of the award in another state or territory under the process service and execution Act 1901 (Cth). Under section 9 of International Arbitration Act 1974, a person seeking enforcement has to bring to the court a properly unique award or a genuinely certified copy and original mediation agreement or a duly certified copy (Jean & Besson, 2007). The court has discretion to grant leave to impose an award, as a matter of practice; leave is given when there is a genuine reason to distrust the legitimacy of the grant. Where leave is not granted, the party seeking enforcement has to resort to the more expensive and time consuming method of bringing an accomplishment upon the grant and obtaining a local verdict. The New York Convention provisions regarding enforcement apply only to the foreign awards which means awards made outside Australia. Challenges The Act amends the application of the Model Law to establish that there will be admissible uncertainties as to the independence of an judge ‘only if there is a risk of partiality on the judge in conducting the mediation’ (section 18A(2) of the Act). This raises the bar parties must reach in order to challenge an arbitrator, from establishing an appearance of bias to requiring that the challenging party put forward facts to prove a ‘real danger’ of unfairness impairing the arbitrator’s exercise of their judgment in the arbitration. A process arranged by the parties for challenges in the arbitration agreement or pursuant to arbitral rules, appropriate procedures must be followed. Where there is no such agreement, the trial is heard by the arbitral tribunal. If the challenge procedure is unsuccessful, the challenging party is allowed to make an appeal to the courts to agree on the trial. A trial to the courts is not subject to appeal. The International Bar Association (IBA) Rules on Engagements of Importance in International Negotiation (the IBA Rules on Engagements of Importance) are not binding; however they are referred to by arbitral tribunals and institutions. Parties may also make reference to the IBA Guidelines on Conflicts of importance in national courts, but there are no reported cases at the time of writing where they have done so (Julian, Loukas, & Stefan, 2003). PART 2 The Parties The claimant John Frost Ltd is a company the deals with direct sell to industrial users of diamonds. The company is situated on Millers Road in Melbourne. The respondent is leading firm by the name Honest Dealers Ltd which is situates on Nathan Road in Hong Kong, the firm deals with selling diamond and acting as Del credere agent. Summary of the claimant claim On 20.5.2008, the Claimant filed its Request for Arbitration where the Claimant alleged that the respondent had not paid him the amount that he owes him. Facts of the claim 1 On 1/12/ 2007 the claimant ( John Frost Ltd) wrote a letter to the respondent ( Honest Dealers) requesting him to enlighten him on the diamond trade in Asia, as they were in the process of selling their latest result of their West Australian diamond mine 2 On 10.12 2007 Honest Dealers replied the letter by accepting to act as either their sales agents or del credere agent where Honest Dealers stated that in order for them to act as the del credere agent their normal fee of 10% will be increased to 25 % and went ahead to advise the claimant to find more information about them on their website 3 Extract from Honest dealer’s website stated that every disagreement, argument or claim coming out of, relating to or in association with the contract, including any demand regarding its presence, rationality or expiry shall be determined by mediation in agreement with the Swiss Arbitration Rules. The seat of Arbitration shall be Zürich. The language shall be English. 4 On 15/12/2007 John Frost Ltd accepted the commissions given by honest dealer and went ahead to give the following Trade terms; Transport is pursuant to DES Incoterms 2000 via secure transport. a letter of credit upon receipt of documentary credit subject to UCP 600 with our Bank in Melbourne will be Opened Any row, disagreement or claim from, relating to or in association with this agreement, including any inquiry regarding its reality, rationality or expiry shall be determined by arbitration in accordance with the Australian Centre for International Commercial Arbitration (ACICA) Arbitration Rules. The seat of Arbitration shall be Singapore. The language shall be English (Marcel & Pilip, 2009) The letter stated that the retention of the services of Mr. Delbon, who is skilled in authentication of the value of the diamonds whose report could be accessed on demand. 5 On 20/12/2007 Honest Dealers sent an email to John Frost Ltd informing them that this was their first time in business and had an interest in buying a sample order from them. They needed 10 cut diamonds as follows Weight: 10 carats each Cut: Princess: Coulour:G.I.A. Scale: D Clarity:G.I.A Scale: F Honest Dealers was willing to pay $20’000 per carat. Goods were to be delivered no later than December 23 by means of secure air transport. After confirmation and receipt of documents, a letter of credit will be opened immediately. 6 On 21/12/2007 John Frost Ltd also replied the letter via email accepting the order and the diamonds were verified by Mr Delbon, the documentation was sent to Honest Dealer’s bank, Goods were delivered by air as per the instructions. 7 On 7/3/2008 Honest Dealers confirmed the delivery of the goods. On the same day Honest Dealers placed an order for their client who was a big international dealer in diamonds who was opening his business in China as follows 20 diamonds weighing 30 carats each: Cut: Princess Color: G.I.A. Scale: D Clarity : GIA Scale: F Price is $6000 per carate. Total price $3,600.000 8 On 10/3/2008 John Frost Ltd accepted the order and advised honest dealers to were to directly deduct their commission from the sales price and only remit the net amount into John Frost Ltd account at the HSCV Bank in Hong Kong 9 On 20/3/2008 John Frost raised their complaint to Honest Dealers about not having received their payment for their last delivery. And requested Honest dealers to sent them the outstanding amount, failure to do so, John Frost Ltd would be forced to commence a legal action. 10 On 20/4/2008 John Frost Ltd rote to Honest Dealers reminding them of the payment as Honest Dealers had not communicated to them. They also raised their concerns about their intended sell of their Hong Kong Premises so as to move the business to China, which forced them to start mediation with ACICA and asked the court to put a hold on the sale in order to protect their interests. 11 On 23/4/2008 Honest Dealers ltd wrote to John Frost Ltd, pointing out that they were not part of the contract and hence action was to be taken against the company in China. The company had not paid them which led to a delay in the payment of the deliveries. They had unsuccessfully tried to force payment. They were objecting to the effort to stop the sale of their premises as they not involved in the sale. They promised to send to John Frost Ltd by separate mail a complaint about the quality of the diamonds. This was the reason for the failure of the Chinese company to make the payment. 12 On 20/5/2008 Ms Francis, Secretary General ACICA, Sydney wrote to Honest Dealers Ltd informing them of the request to arbitration that had been lodged with ACICA by. The proceedings were to be done on July I, 2009 in Singapore. The statement of claim was enclosed in the letter. John Frost Ltd selected Mr .Delbon as their arbitrator, a diamonds verifier expert. And requested Honest Dealers to submit their arbitrator. 13 On 30/5/2008 wrote to Ms Frances telling her that they had chosen Mr Ying as their arbitrator and said that they had three objections which they will present and further elaborate on the their memorial as respondents were in their statement of claim which was attached. Summary of pleadings 1. In adherence to art 14(1) and 18(1) of the Canadian Instrumentation Services Group (CISG), a contract exists between John Frost Ltd and Honest Dealers. Honest Dealers accepted this forum clause by replying the letter by accepting to act either as sales or Del credere agents. Any Dispute, controversy or claim arising out of, in relation to or in connection with this contract, including any question regarding its existence, validity or termination shall be resolved by arbitration in accordance with the ACICA Arbitration Rules. The seat of Settlement shall be Singapore. The language shall be English. Arbitration Rules require parties to have a written agreement to allow KLRCA to arbitrate. The letter sent on 15/12/ 2007 by John Frost Ltd satisfies this rule. Pleadings A. A contract existed between the John Frost Ltd and Honest Dealers A sale agreement should not be involved in or demonstrated by writing and is not subject matter to any other constraint as stated in Article 11 of the United Nations Convention on Agreements for International Sale of Goods. The essential of writing was done through data messages as stated in article 6 of the Electronic Commerce Laws. In the CISG case of The Travelers Property Casualty Co. v. Saint-Gobain Technical Fabrics Canada Ltd6, the court held on formation of an oral contract prior to the sending of purchase orders. This is similar to the present case as the phone calls and exchange of emails made by John Frost to Honest Dealers can be stipulated as forming a basis of a contract. SM Integrated Transware Pte Ltd. v. Schenker Singapore (Pte) Ltd7 is the reference in the High Court of Singapore that confirms that an agreement can be concluded by an exchange of emails and shall be binding on the parties (Mauro, 2001). There is an existence of a contract between both parties as the CLAIMANT made an offer as stated under article 14(1) of the CISG. The offer was made by John Frost Ltd by a telephone call when he ordered a large quantity of bananas on 15 July 2010. Honest Dealers accepted the offer later on the same day by sending a confirming Bill of Sale which formed a valid contract between the two parties, Pursuant to article 18(1)9 of the CISG. Confirmation may be through any form statement by the addressee in article 14(2) of the Electronic Commerce Law. There were a number of emails exchanged throughout this time. An example of article 14 of the Electronic Commerce Law is Clout Case 42910. In this case the invoice issued by the plaintiff could not be construed as an offer as it formed the final agreement. In the present case, the offer was made by email which was accepted pursuant to article 18(1) of the CISG11. A case that illustrates this is Clout Case 19312. In this case, the court believed that the parties had settled on the initial purchase price. The court viewed of the notification made by the seller to the buyer on the raise in the purchase price as an offer to adjust the initial contract to which the buyer had not showed a clear approval. Silence or inactivity does not mean that Honest Dealers had accepted the offer except if another conduct of the offeree existed which indicated the consent or if the offeree performed an act pursuant to CISG in articles 18(1) and 18(3). Acceptance of the offer made by the CLAIMANT was performed by sending a confirming Bill of Sale from the RESPONDENT. In addition, a second contract existed between both parties in relation to the forum clause. A mediation clause which is part of an agreement shall be treated independently from the other terms of the agreement a reinforcement in article (1) of the Model Law. The offer was made pursuant to article (1) of the CISG. This offer was made by the Claimant if any dispute was to arise. A conclusion by the arbitral tribunal that the contract did not exist shall not make the ipso jure arbitration clause invalid. This is reinforced by Clout Case 19316 where conduct can be stipulated as acceptance. It is submitted by the CLAIMANT that the contract is under CIF INCOTERMS 2000 even though the Bill of Sale does indicate that the contract is FOB. He further states that the CLAIMANT is counting on Mr. Delbon to make sure the diamond arrives in excellent condition. Secondly, under a CIF agreement the seller is obligated to organize the shipment whilst in an FOB agreement the buyer is obligated to arrange for shipment (Moser & Cheng, 2008). The seller is accountable for costs, insurance and freight for transporting the goods to the arranged destination; however the buyer will incur the risks and any additional costs incurred after distribution of commodities as per the CIF agreement. B. Under Article II of the New York Agreement the Arbitration Clause satisfies the validity standards John Frost Ltd and Honest Dealers have ratified and are contracting parties with reference to the New York Convention. An arbitration agreement must be in writing, with a well defined legal relationship between the parties, and the capability of the matter for settlement by arbitration, as stated in Article II of the New York Convention. The forum clause between the CLAIMANT and the RESPONDENT satisfies the Art 2 writing requirements as the two parties accepted the clause included in the contract. Furthermore, a clear legal relationship arises when a contract contains an arbitration clause applicable to all disputes arising from the contract. John Frost Ltd and Honest Dealers by entering into the Contract consummated a defined legal relationship. The CLAIMANT is seeking to paid for the cost of goods sold to the RESPONDENT who breached the contract, a matter consequently suitable for settlement by arbitration, met in the official necessities of article II (1) of the New York Convention (Steven, 2002). C. Singapore Regional Centre for Arbitration has authority to resolve this dispute Arbitration is a method that can be used to resolve this dispute as the limitation period has not expired. Under article 8 of the Limitation Period Convention the limitation period is four years. The forum selected is the KLRCA. Under Rule 1 of the KLRCA Arbitration Rules parties have to agree in writing to arbitrate their disputes in relation to the Rules. The party adopted the model forum clause of the Rules and was exchanged via written emails. In addition under article 18 of the CISG, acceptance can be indicated by conduct as illustrated by Clout Case 193 (Jenkins & Simon, 2006). II. The following laws and legal principles apply to this dispute A. United Nations Convention on Contracts for International Sale of Goods 1980 There are three requirements that need satisfaction. Firstly, CISG is applicable to agreements of sale of goods between groups whose business places are in different countries under article 1(1). Melbourne and Hong Kong are two different states with different domestic laws. Secondly, the states must be contracting states to the CISG, under article 1(1) (a) of the CISG. However, in this case, if one of the parties is not a contracting state, the CISG will use where the law of the contract is applicable in the contracting state under article 1(1) (b) of the CISG. The basis of the contract between the two parties is enshrined in the law of Singapore which is part of the contract to the CISG. Thirdly, the CISG applies if the aim of the contract is commercial nature with no exceptions listed in object 2 of the CISG. The agreement is for the sale and purchase of diamond which is commercial in nature and not listed under the exceptions in article 2 (Toa, 2008). Clout Case 131 shows that the CISG was applicable as the two parties had business places in different states. The CISG applies to standard software as a commercial product. Furthermore, the court also found that the parties had agreed on all the particulars of the sale of the program and therefore had concluded a sales contract. B. UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration 1985 The Model Law is a universal instrument, but is not an international convention in that it is not binding until it has been incorporated into the national law of each member of the United Nations. In Article 1(a) it is stated that negotiation is transnational if the parties to the agreement have commercial actives in different states. Both Melbourne City and Hong Kong City are in different states. Furthermore, both Melbourne and Hong Kong have domestically adopted the Model Law making it applicable to this dispute. C. UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce 1996 The Electronic Commerce Law does apply to this dispute as article 1 states that it applies to information in the context of money-making activities in form of data messages. Data messages are defined under article 2 of Electronic Commerce law as organized, directed, expected or archived information in computers or print means. The emails sent between the CLAIMANT and the RESPONDENT is data messages and was used to form the terms of the contract for the sale of diamond which were commercial in nature (Lar, 2003). Conclusion In respect to the above submission, the Counsel appeals to the Court to ensure that: jurisdiction considers this argument under the arbitration forum clause in the agreement; The CISG and supporting conventions apply to this dispute; Respectfully Submitted, Agents for John Frost Ltd – the CLAIMANT REFERENCES Alan, R. (2004). Law and practice of international commercial arbitration. london: Sweet & Maxwell Limited. Arnold, Z. (1984). Arbitration in practice. Ithaca: Cornell University. Erick, S., Herman, V., & Christopher, I. (2005). ICC arbitration in practice. Netherlands: Kluwer Law international. Genzberger, C. (1994). Singapore Business: The portable encyclopedia for doing business with Singapore. Paris: ICC Publishing S.A. Jean, F., & Besson, S. (2007). Comparative law of international arbitration. london: Sweet & Maxwel. Julian, D., Loukas, A., & Stefan, K. (2003). Comparative international commercial arbitration. Netherlands: Kluwer Law International. Jenkins, J & Simon, S (2006). International construction arbitration law. Netherlands: Kluwer Law International. Lar, H. (2003). Arbitration law of Sweden: practice and procedure. New York: Juris Publishing Inc. Marcel, F., & Pilip, D. (2009). Drafting International Contracts. Netherlands: Trasnational Publishers. Mauro, R. S. (2001). International arbitration law and practice. Nethelands: Kluwer Law International. Moser, M., & Cheng, T. (2008). Hong Kong arbitration: a user's guide. Hong Kong: CCH Hong Kong Limited. Steven, C. (2002). Arbitration: essential concepts. New York: Amarican Lawyer Media. Toa, J. (2008). Arbitration law and practice in China. Netherlands: Kluwer Law International. The World Business, O. (2011). International Chamber of Commerce. Retrieved 12 29, 2011, from International Court of Arbitration: Dispute Resolution Services: http://www.iccwbo.org/court/arbitration/id4199/index.html Read More