Applying the Federal Arbitration Act and recognizing that it “reflects a liberal federal policy favoring arbitration agreements,” the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York granted the defendant’s motion to compel arbitration, finding that the arbitration provision at issue was as expansive as similar clauses that the Second Circuit has previously described as the “paradigm of a broad clause establishing a presumption of arbitrability.”
Plaintiff Kuehne + Nagel Inc., a logistics service provider that arranges the transportation of freight, and defendant Baker Hughes were parties to a global air freight transportation contract, which included an alternative dispute resolution provision that applied “[i]n the event of any dispute between the Parties hereto arising from or relating to this contract…
Read the complete story here.
On 21 March 2022, the member states of the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) approved wide-ranging amendments to the ICSID Regulations and Rules, which will come into...
By Andrew Cannon, Vanessa NaishIn this episode of the Arbitration Conversation, Amy interviews David Tenner, an arbitrator, a special master to area courts, and a trained mediator. He is a member of the commercial...
By David M. TennerIn this round of Arbitration Tips-N-Tools, Professor Amy Schmitz asks some of the leading arbitration practitioners about when an online arbitration (OArb) might be less beneficial than in-person arbitration, especially...
By Olof Heggemann, Oladeji Tiamiyu, Myriam Seers, Amy Schmitz
With the purchase of a Featured Membership, you will be shown on the front page of Arbitrate.com to web site visitors from your city and region (“state” if you are in the USA). You may appear in more than one city/region by purchasing additional locations.
