法律与经济学视角下的仲裁

Anne van Aaken, Tomer Broude
{"title":"法律与经济学视角下的仲裁","authors":"Anne van Aaken, Tomer Broude","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2860584","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter offers a Law & Economics (L&E) perspective on\n international arbitration. L&E scholars tend to view dispute\n resolution as a market. They thus look at the supply and demand of such\n third-party adjudication, usually comparing litigation to arbitration.\n Predominantly, in the literature, there are two interrelated L&E\n perspectives on this: one is focused on the general welfare consequences\n of arbitration; the other is focused on why disputants choose one kind\n of third-party settlement over another. There are many ways of resolving\n disputes between contractual parties: arbitration is also in competition\n with mediation, conciliation, litigation, and other forms of resolving\n disputes, including so-called ‘extra-legal’, socially normative ones.\n Most literature has focused either on the choice between litigation and\n arbitration or on the influence of arbitration on negotiation and\n settlement between the parties. The chapter then addresses other\n disputant choices relating to third-party funding and arbitrator\n appointment. It also looks at the incentives and behaviour of\n arbitrators, including their cognitive abilities.","PeriodicalId":125434,"journal":{"name":"Hebrew University of Jerusalem Legal Studies Research Paper Series","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Arbitration from a Law & Economics Perspective\",\"authors\":\"Anne van Aaken, Tomer Broude\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2860584\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This chapter offers a Law & Economics (L&E) perspective on\\n international arbitration. L&E scholars tend to view dispute\\n resolution as a market. They thus look at the supply and demand of such\\n third-party adjudication, usually comparing litigation to arbitration.\\n Predominantly, in the literature, there are two interrelated L&E\\n perspectives on this: one is focused on the general welfare consequences\\n of arbitration; the other is focused on why disputants choose one kind\\n of third-party settlement over another. There are many ways of resolving\\n disputes between contractual parties: arbitration is also in competition\\n with mediation, conciliation, litigation, and other forms of resolving\\n disputes, including so-called ‘extra-legal’, socially normative ones.\\n Most literature has focused either on the choice between litigation and\\n arbitration or on the influence of arbitration on negotiation and\\n settlement between the parties. The chapter then addresses other\\n disputant choices relating to third-party funding and arbitrator\\n appointment. It also looks at the incentives and behaviour of\\n arbitrators, including their cognitive abilities.\",\"PeriodicalId\":125434,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Hebrew University of Jerusalem Legal Studies Research Paper Series\",\"volume\":\"2 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-10-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Hebrew University of Jerusalem Legal Studies Research Paper Series\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2860584\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hebrew University of Jerusalem Legal Studies Research Paper Series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2860584","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本章从法律与经济学(L&E)的角度来看待国际仲裁。L&E学者倾向于将争端解决视为一个市场。因此,他们着眼于此类第三方裁决的供求关系,通常将诉讼与仲裁进行比较。主要是,在文献中,有两个相互关联的L&E观点:一个是专注于仲裁的一般福利后果;另一个重点是争论者为什么选择一种第三方解决方案而不是另一种。解决合同当事人之间纠纷的方式有很多:仲裁也与调解、和解、诉讼和其他解决纠纷的形式相竞争,包括所谓的“法外”、社会规范的形式。大多数文献要么集中在诉讼与仲裁的选择上,要么集中在仲裁对当事人之间的谈判和解决的影响上。然后,本章讨论了与第三方资助和仲裁员任命有关的其他争议选择。它还考察了仲裁员的动机和行为,包括他们的认知能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Arbitration from a Law & Economics Perspective
This chapter offers a Law & Economics (L&E) perspective on international arbitration. L&E scholars tend to view dispute resolution as a market. They thus look at the supply and demand of such third-party adjudication, usually comparing litigation to arbitration. Predominantly, in the literature, there are two interrelated L&E perspectives on this: one is focused on the general welfare consequences of arbitration; the other is focused on why disputants choose one kind of third-party settlement over another. There are many ways of resolving disputes between contractual parties: arbitration is also in competition with mediation, conciliation, litigation, and other forms of resolving disputes, including so-called ‘extra-legal’, socially normative ones. Most literature has focused either on the choice between litigation and arbitration or on the influence of arbitration on negotiation and settlement between the parties. The chapter then addresses other disputant choices relating to third-party funding and arbitrator appointment. It also looks at the incentives and behaviour of arbitrators, including their cognitive abilities.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Three Modes of Regulating Price Terms in Standard-Form Contracts: The Israeli Experience Tastes, Values, and the Future of Law and Economics Arbitration from a Law & Economics Perspective Law and Behavioral Economics Who Cares About Regulatory Space in BITs? A Comparative International Approach
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1