IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Justice as Conflict Resolution: Proliferation, Fragmentation and Decentralization of Dispute Settlement in International Trade

Listed author(s):
  • Ernst-Ulrich Petersmann
Registered author(s):

    Prevention and resolution of conflicts on the basis of agreed rules and just procedures is a common objective of private and public, national and international law (chapter I). The diversity of national and international dispute settlement fora and procedures sets incentives for 'forum shopping' and 'rules shopping' not only in private commercial law (chapter II), but increasingly also in public international economic law (chapter III). Effective litigation strategies must examine the respective (dis)advantages of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) methods and fora (chapter IV). ADR options are increasingly important also for various categories of dispute settlement proceedings in the World Trade Organization (WTO, chapter V). Optimal dispute prevention and dispute settlement strategies require distinguishing the different categories of international trade disputes according to their underlying conflicts of interests, promoting legal consistency between international and domestic dispute settlement proceedings, and 'decentralizing' certain kinds of international economic disputes over private rights (chapter VI). Jurisdictional competition, forum shopping, rules shopping, and the increasing number of mutually conflicting judgments by national and international courts call for international cooperation among judges so as to promote more respect for international law through transnational, judicial networks (chapter VII).

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by European University Institute (EUI), Department of Law in its series EUI-LAW Working Papers with number 10.

    in new window

    Date of creation: 01 Sep 2004
    Handle: RePEc:erp:euilaw:p0011
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:erp:euilaw:p0011. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Machteld Nijsten)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.