This study looks at the interaction between cost allocation systems as they have developed in national civil procedure and the cost allocation principles found in the arbitration rules of those jurisdictions. I define two basic approaches to cost allocation: one, known as the 'American rule', which is outcome neutral and the other, which is the allocation of costs based on the outcome of the case. Within the latter 'outcome based' allocation, I identify three methods. After looking at the policy considerations which drive these four approaches, the study analyses the cost decisions of fifty-three awards, with a view to identifying any empirical evidence of a default principle of last allocation in international arbitration.
Journal of International Arbitration