Dejan Janićijević

DOI Number
First page
Last page


The author presents key issues related to participation of multiple parties in the arbitration procedure. Consolidation of arbitration proceeding, resulting in a multi-party procedural relationship, as well as joinder and intervention of third persons, non-signatories to the arbitration agreement, are viewed for the purpose of identifying possible problems their emergence in arbitration may cause. The development of judicial approach to procedural questions raised by participation of multiple subjects in the contractual relationships, out of which the dispute before the arbitral tribunal has arisen, is showcased through the analysis of the 2010 United States Supreme Court Decision, which sets grounds for restricting multi-party arbitration only to situations where participation of multiple parties in a single proceeding is expressly provided for in the arbitration agreement.

Full Text:



Carole J. Buckner, Toward a Pure Arbitral Paradigm of Classwide Arbitration: Arbitral Power and Federal Preemption, 82 DENV. U.L. REV, 2004.

Thomas J. Stipanowich, Punitive Damages and the Consumerization of Arbitration, 92 NW. U. L. REV, 1997.

Lew, J. – Applicable Law in International Commercial Arbitration, 1978.

J. – L’Arbitrage – Droit Interne, Droit International Prive, 1993.

Carbonneau, T. – The Elaboration of a French Court Doctrine on International Com-mercial Arbitration: A Study in Liberal Civilian Judicial Creativity, 55 Tul. L. Rev, 1980.

Carbonneau, T. – The Reform of the French Procedural Law on Arbitration: An Analytical Commentary on the Decree of May 14, 1980, 4 Hastings Int’l & Comp. L. Rev, 1981.

Rau, A. – Sherman, E. – Tradition and Innovation in International Arbitration Proce-dure, 30 Tex. Int’l L.J., 1995.

Lamm, C. – Aqua, J. – Defining the Party – Who is a Proper Party in an International Arbitration Before the American Arbitration Association and Other International Institutions, 34 Geo. Wash. Int’l L. Rev, 2002-2003.

Jarosson, C. – Convention d`arbitrage et groupes de societes, ASA Special Series, No. 8, 1994.

Sandrock, O. – Extending the Scope of Arbitration Agreements to Non-Signatories, ASA Special Series, No. 8, 1994.

Blessing, M. – Extension of the Scope of an Arbitration Clause to Non-Signatories, ASA Special Series, No. 8, 1994.

Hascher, D. – Consolidation of Arbitration by American Courts: Fostering or Hampering International Commerical Arbitration?, J. Int’l Arb., No. 1, 1984

Schaeffer, E. – Compulsory Consolidation of Commercial Arbitration Disputes, 33 Sa-int Louis Univ. L. J., 1988/1989.

Knežević, G. – The Annulmant of the Foreign Trade Arbitration Awards, The International Trade Arbitration – Status and Perspectives, Belgrade, 1997

Baldwin, C. – Protecting Confidential and Proprietary Commercial Information in International Arbitration, 31 Tex. Int’l L.J., 1996,

Rau, A. – Sherman, E. – Tradition and Innovation in International Arbitration Procedure, 30 Tex. Int’l L.J., 1995.

Schwartz, Е. – Multiparty disputes and Consolidated Arbitrations: An Oxymoron or the Solution to a Continuing Dilemma?, 22 Case W.Res. J. Int’l L., 1990

Hoellering, M. – Consolidated Arbitration: Will it Result in Increased Efficiency or an Affront to Party Autonomy?, Disp. Res. J., 1997.

Higgins, C. – Interim Measures in Transnational Maritime Arbitration, 65 Tul. L. Rev, 1991.

Redfern, A. – Hunter, M. – Law and Practice of International Commercial Arbitra-tion, 1991.

Aksen, G. – American Arbitral Accession Arrives in the Age of Aquarius: United States Implements the United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, 3 South-Western Univ. L. Rev., 1971.

Rau, A. – Sherman, E. – Tradition and Innovation in International Arbitration Proce-dure, 30.Tex. Int’l L.J., 1995.

Stipanovich, T. – Arbitration and Multiparty Dispute: The Search for Workable Solu-tions, 72.Iowa L. Rev., 1987.

Motomura, H. – Arbitration and Collateral Estoppel: Using Preclusion to Shаpe Pro-cedural Chоices, 63.Tul. L. Rev., 1988.

Miller, Н. – Consolidated Arbitrations in New York Maritime Disputes, 14.Int’l Bus. L., 1986.

Hanotiau, B. – Problems Raised by Complex Arbitrations Involving Multiple Contracts-Parties-Issues: An Analysis, 18 J. Int’l Arb., 2001.

Kerr, J. – Smit, H. – Comparison of International Arbitration Rules, 2002,

Smit, H. – Pechota, V. – A Chart Comparing International Commercial Arbitration Rules, 1998

Smit, H. – Pechotа, V. – Arbitration Rules – National Institutions, 1998

Nariman, F. – International Arbitration in the Twenty-First Century: Concepts, Instruments and Techniques, Trade, Law and Development, Vol 1, No 2, 2009

Stolt-Nielsen s. a. v. Animalfeeds Int’l Corp. ( no. 08-1198 ) 548 f. 3d 85

Green Tree Financial Corp. V. Bazzle (02-634) 539 u.s. 444 (2003) 351 s. C. 244, 569 s. E. 2d 349

Lloyd‟s London v. Westchester Fire Ins. Co., 489 F.3d 580, 590 (3d Cir. 2007)

Rollins, Inc. v. Garrett, 176 F. App‟x 968, 969 (11th Cir. Apr. 19, 2006)

Pedcor Mgmt. v. Nations Pers. of Tex., 343 F.3d 355, 363 (5th Cir. 2003)

Champ v. Siegel Trading Co., 55 F.3d 269, 275 (7th Cir. 1995)

Westchester Fire Ins. Co., (489 F.3d 580, 590 (3d Cir. 2007)

Volt Info. Sci., Inc. v. Board of Trustees of Leland Stanford Junior Univ., 489 U.S. (1989)

Mastrobuono v. Shearson Lehman Hutton, Inc., 514 U.S.

Carte Blanche Pte. Ltd.Singapur v. Carte Blanche International Ltd. 888 F2d 260


  • There are currently no refbacks.

ISSN 1450-5517 (Print)
ISSN 2406-1786 (Online)