Unifying competing dispute resolution processes into a one-stop arbitration

Peter Gillies, Mona L Hymel

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Whether a court should stay or alternatively refuse to stay proceedings in the court to avoid or minimise a multiplicity of proceedings - arbitral and curial - that focus on essentially the same or a related cluster of disputes, arises from time to time in domestic and international commercial arbitration situations. The parties generally want their dispute to be consolidated in the one adjudication. As a party to an arbitration agreement, this one-stop adjudication will be achieved by way of arbitration. This paper examines the responses of the courts and legislatures to this and related issues in common law jurisdictions.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)169-178
Number of pages10
JournalAsia Pacific Law Review
Volume17
Issue numberSPECIAL ISSUE 1
StatePublished - 2009

Fingerprint

arbitration
common law
jurisdiction
time

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Law

Cite this

Unifying competing dispute resolution processes into a one-stop arbitration. / Gillies, Peter; Hymel, Mona L.

In: Asia Pacific Law Review, Vol. 17, No. SPECIAL ISSUE 1, 2009, p. 169-178.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{87183483a7044907af04bce99933776b,
title = "Unifying competing dispute resolution processes into a one-stop arbitration",
abstract = "Whether a court should stay or alternatively refuse to stay proceedings in the court to avoid or minimise a multiplicity of proceedings - arbitral and curial - that focus on essentially the same or a related cluster of disputes, arises from time to time in domestic and international commercial arbitration situations. The parties generally want their dispute to be consolidated in the one adjudication. As a party to an arbitration agreement, this one-stop adjudication will be achieved by way of arbitration. This paper examines the responses of the courts and legislatures to this and related issues in common law jurisdictions.",
author = "Peter Gillies and Hymel, {Mona L}",
year = "2009",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "17",
pages = "169--178",
journal = "Asia Pacific Law Review",
issn = "1019-2557",
publisher = "LexisNexis",
number = "SPECIAL ISSUE 1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Unifying competing dispute resolution processes into a one-stop arbitration

AU - Gillies, Peter

AU - Hymel, Mona L

PY - 2009

Y1 - 2009

N2 - Whether a court should stay or alternatively refuse to stay proceedings in the court to avoid or minimise a multiplicity of proceedings - arbitral and curial - that focus on essentially the same or a related cluster of disputes, arises from time to time in domestic and international commercial arbitration situations. The parties generally want their dispute to be consolidated in the one adjudication. As a party to an arbitration agreement, this one-stop adjudication will be achieved by way of arbitration. This paper examines the responses of the courts and legislatures to this and related issues in common law jurisdictions.

AB - Whether a court should stay or alternatively refuse to stay proceedings in the court to avoid or minimise a multiplicity of proceedings - arbitral and curial - that focus on essentially the same or a related cluster of disputes, arises from time to time in domestic and international commercial arbitration situations. The parties generally want their dispute to be consolidated in the one adjudication. As a party to an arbitration agreement, this one-stop adjudication will be achieved by way of arbitration. This paper examines the responses of the courts and legislatures to this and related issues in common law jurisdictions.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=75449114691&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=75449114691&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 17

SP - 169

EP - 178

JO - Asia Pacific Law Review

JF - Asia Pacific Law Review

SN - 1019-2557

IS - SPECIAL ISSUE 1

ER -