SPECIAL REPORT 15
If anywhere is the cradle of regional arbitration, it is Asia. Case numbers have grown, arbitral institutions proliferate and innovate, national legislation is being amended and standardised. Is this growth simply a function of and a response to global trends, or does Asia stand alone? This article examines the latest status of some of Asia’s major arbitral centres and arbitration trends and the factors influencing the choice of seat by consumers of arbitration.
GROWTH OUTSTRIPPED The story of global arbitration over the past five years is one of growth, both in terms of case numbers and case values. The GAR 30 ranking of worldwide arbitration shows that the number of pending claims being handled by the world’s 30 leading arbitration firms, including Clyde&Co, has risen fromaround 2,000 to around 3,000 since 2011, while the aggregate value of those claims has risen fromUSD 643 billion to USD 1,613 billion. However, the growth of arbitration in Asia has been even greater, at least in terms of sheer numbers of cases. In the introduction to his 2013 book “Arbitration in Asia”, Michael Moser observes that, comparedwith twenty years ago, “the number of cases handled by arbitration institutions inMainland China and Hong Kong together has outstripped that of the International Chamber of Commerce in Paris, the London Court of International Arbitration, the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce and other well-knownWestern arbitration institutions.” WHERE ARE A SIA’S ARBITRATION CENTRES? What do wemeanwhenwe talk about arbitration in Asia? On 2 November 2004, representatives of 17 arbitration centres and associations in Asia Pacificmet in Sydney and established the Asia Pacific Regional Arbitration Group (APRAG); there are now41members. This growth in itself puts an analysis of each and every arbitration centre in Asia outside the scope of this article. APRAG, of course, includes bodies in Australia, while geographically speaking, somemight consider Asia to include Dubai and theMiddle East. Any choice will be necessarily subjective. TheMiddle East and Australia are big and interesting arbitrationmarkets in their own right. They are geographical, and to some extent cultural, outliers in Asia. They deserve their own articles, or amore detailed analysis than space here will allow. This article will therefore focus on a selection of what remains – some newarbitral centres, somemore established, with a variety of legal, political and cultural backgrounds: Singapore, Hong Kong, China, Seoul, Kuala Lumpur and Tokyo.
Made with FlippingBook Online newsletter