Abstract
The presence of a foreign element in a legal relationship inevitably introduces intricate choice-of-law issues. This postulate holds especially true in the context of international arbitration. Arbitration involves an exceptional degree of procedural freedom (including over the choice of the applicable law) and a distinctive conflict-of-laws regime that may be unbound from a particular national legal system. This article examines several choice-of-law issues arising in the context of international arbitration. In particular, Section I of this article addresses whether the United Nations Convention on Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, otherwise known as the New York Convention, is selfexecuting under United States law. The answer to this question weighs into the analysis of Section II of this article, which examines the question whether the McCarran-Ferguson Act of 1945 applies to the New York Convention and Chapter II of the Federal Arbitration Act. Finally, Section III of this article examines prevalent approaches to determining the law applicable to an international arbitration agreement.
Repository Citation
Peter B. Rutledge,
International Arbitration and Conflicts of Law: Three Hard Questions for Symeon
, 60 Willamette L. Rev. 805
(2025),
Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/fac_artchop/1797
Included in
Comparative and Foreign Law Commons, Conflict of Laws Commons, Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Commons, International Law Commons