Parties to cross–border disputes are developing a preference for international commercial arbitration as a desired alternative to litigation in the national courts. This trend owes much to the popular pro–arbitration belief that arbitrating parties are granted the autonomy to control their own decision–making process. But is this true? This article explores whether party autonomy is achieved in practice in international commercial arbitration or whether the parties still find themselves burdened with quasilitigious constraints. Upon considering the experience of international parties from an Australian and English perspective, this article finds that the restrictions imposed on parties to international commercial arbitration have developed so as to protect the freedoms they can exercise in the process.
Journal of International Arbitration