https://lettersblogatory.com/2011/01/11/arbitral-tribunals-as-tribunals-under-the-judicial-assistance-statute/ The Blog of International Judicial Assistance Fri, 13 Dec 2024 21:51:15 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4 https://lettersblogatory.com/2011/01/11/arbitral-tribunals-as-tribunals-under-the-judicial-assistance-statute/#comment-24183 Fri, 13 Dec 2024 21:51:15 +0000 http://lettersblogatory.com/?p=29#comment-24183 […] whether the arbitration likewise was within the scope of the statute. For the reasons I gave in an earlier post, I think the correct construction of the statute should exclude foreign private arbitrations from […]

]]> https://lettersblogatory.com/2011/01/11/arbitral-tribunals-as-tribunals-under-the-judicial-assistance-statute/#comment-24175 Fri, 13 Dec 2024 20:25:12 +0000 http://lettersblogatory.com/?p=29#comment-24175 […] arbitrations were inapposite. (Speaking editorially, I think that this is right. I have previously explained why I think the statute should not be read to extend to foreign private arbitrations, but […]

]]> https://lettersblogatory.com/2011/01/11/arbitral-tribunals-as-tribunals-under-the-judicial-assistance-statute/#comment-24101 Fri, 13 Dec 2024 02:46:06 +0000 http://lettersblogatory.com/?p=29#comment-24101 […] on the fact that the tribunal’s decisions are not subject to judicial review. I have instead suggested that it would be anomalous to read the statute to refer to private international arbitral […]

]]> https://lettersblogatory.com/2011/01/11/arbitral-tribunals-as-tribunals-under-the-judicial-assistance-statute/#comment-20 Tue, 06 Oct 2020 15:46:55 +0000 http://lettersblogatory.com/?p=29#comment-20 […] or produce documents for use in a proceeding in a foreign or international tribunal. There is a split of authority among the lower courts on whether an arbitral tribunal is a “tribunal” for purposes of […]

]]> https://lettersblogatory.com/2011/01/11/arbitral-tribunals-as-tribunals-under-the-judicial-assistance-statute/#comment-19 Tue, 06 Oct 2020 15:32:38 +0000 http://lettersblogatory.com/?p=29#comment-19 […] pretty conclusory on this question, one way or the other. The closest looks I’ve taken are here and here. It’s true that some legislative history supports the idea that a private arbitral […]

]]> https://lettersblogatory.com/2011/01/11/arbitral-tribunals-as-tribunals-under-the-judicial-assistance-statute/#comment-18 Tue, 14 Apr 2020 13:30:24 +0000 http://lettersblogatory.com/?p=29#comment-18 […] have previously noted reasons for hesitating before treating private arbitral tribunals as tribunals for purposes of […]

]]> https://lettersblogatory.com/2011/01/11/arbitral-tribunals-as-tribunals-under-the-judicial-assistance-statute/#comment-17 Wed, 27 Jun 2012 10:00:54 +0000 http://lettersblogatory.com/?p=29#comment-17 […] have previously noted reasons for hesitating before treating private arbitral tribunals as tribunals for purposes of […]

]]> https://lettersblogatory.com/2011/01/11/arbitral-tribunals-as-tribunals-under-the-judicial-assistance-statute/#comment-16 Fri, 22 Jun 2012 16:06:10 +0000 http://lettersblogatory.com/?p=29#comment-16 […] “tribunals” for purposes of the judicial assistance statute–a point made on this blog a couple of weeks ago. Her article is worth a read. arbitration, judicial assistance statute […]

]]> https://lettersblogatory.com/2011/01/11/arbitral-tribunals-as-tribunals-under-the-judicial-assistance-statute/#comment-15 Thu, 05 Jan 2012 03:57:13 +0000 http://lettersblogatory.com/?p=29#comment-15 […] arbitrations were inapposite. (Speaking editorially, I think that this is right. I have previously explained why I think the statute should not be read to extend to foreign private arbitrations, but […]

]]> https://lettersblogatory.com/2011/01/11/arbitral-tribunals-as-tribunals-under-the-judicial-assistance-statute/#comment-14 Wed, 09 Nov 2011 18:47:30 +0000 http://lettersblogatory.com/?p=29#comment-14 […] private arbitrations). As I wrote in my post on Gary Born’s take on In re Caratube and in an earlier post on arbitral tribunals as “tribunals” for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1782, it is anomalous to permit parties to international arbitrations to have free access to US […]

]]>