4 ms·
Ok. You won. I'm scared. I have been wondering why there is not organization that makes it easy in 2012 to have a company that operates across several countrie
by Iv 14y ago
Ok. You won. I'm scared.
I have been wondering why there is not organization that makes it easy in 2012 to have a company that operates across several countries. I thought that simply creating a legal framework was taking some time but that finally legislators would manage to get there, they are just lagging behind.
But this... I don't want this. I don't want a private justice, I don't want "arbitration" to become the norm in the way conflicts are handled in the global village. No, this must not happen, this is the root of too many dystopian visions.
Arbitration : this artificial "court" decides arbitrarily who is right and once this is done, the initial dispute is still there. If the "loser" does not accept the arbitration, you still have to go to court. It solves nothing.
You know what is the next step ? A private police to enforce the decision of the arbitration court. You would sign in the initial agreement all the necessary authorizations for that. It would work. It would be legal. And even if illegal, an army of lawyers would delay several years the application of the real law.
I don't want that.
- peterjancelis 14y agoOur arbitral awards are binding in 146 countries because they comply with the 1958 Convention of New York. For private commercial disputes, governments have given up their jurisdictional monopoly a long time ago and I disagree with you that this is a bad thing.
- Iv 14y agoOk. Say I have a client that does not want to pay me. I live in France, the client is in Japan. Contract signed under the Japanese law. Let's supposed we had chosen you for arbitration. I win the arbitration but the client refuses to comply. What happens ?
- peterjancelis 14y agoYou buy an Affidavit of Arbitration from us (costs $35) and than ask the a court in any jurisdiction where the losing party has assets to recognize and enforce your award. Most jurisdictions will add the cost of court recognition to the amount of assets to be seized. http://www.judge.me/online_arbitration#enforcement http://www.judge.me/online_arbitration#enforcement
- Iv 14y agoOk, so instead of just going to court, I have to do arbitration first, and then go to court. Sorry, I don't see what your added value is.
- peterjancelis 14y ago1. Recognition of arbitral award is much faster. 2. Awards can be recognized in 146 countries. 3. In 96% of the cases recognition is not even needed, the losing party pays up.
- Iv 14y ago1. Sure, it is much faster than getting a court involved but I think that in most case where you intervene, an agreement would have been reached without going to court either. 2. That just means that you found 146 countries where a breach of contract is illegal. 3. How do you measure the 96% ? I am doubtful of such a high statistic. Do you provide legal help if going to court is necessary to enforce the arbitration ? With such a high rate of success, it would be profitable for you and be really helpful. My basic claim is that your service is indeed cheap but is logically probably worth little more than what you charge. Going into court is much more expensive and I doubt that you really can avoid such an event.
- peterjancelis 14y ago1. I fail to see how using an arbitration clause in your contracts results in only disputes that would be resolved without court. 2. It means 146 countries have signed the 1958 New York convention. 3. The 96% is a CIArb statistic.