More news on: Center for the Study of Dispute Resolution (CSDR), Prof. S.I. Strong

Professor Strong Publishes New Works

November 20th, 2014

Prof. S.I. Strong

Professor S.I. Strong has had several new works published recently.

“Limits of Autonomy in International Investment Arbitration: Are Contractual Waivers of Mass Procedures Enforceable?” appears in Contemporary Issues in International Arbitration and Mediation: The Fordham Papers 2013 141 (Martinus Nijhoff, 2015), and considers whether and to what extent parties can contractually waive large-scale arbitral proceedings similar to those that arose in the ground-breaking investment arbitration, Abaclat v. Argentine Republic. Abaclat is remarkable in that it allowed 60,000 Italian bondholders to join together in a single proceeding and seek compensation from Argentina following Argentina’s default on its sovereign bonds.

“Contractual Waivers of Investment Arbitration: Wa(i)ve of the Future?” in 29 ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal 690 (2014), considers the question of whether parties can waive their right to investment arbitration through investment contracts with a foreign state. This issue came to a head earlier this year, when the Republic of Colombia attempted to insert an explicit waiver provision in a model concession agreement.

“International Litigation – Arbitration” appears in the Encyclopedia of Law and Economics (Springer, 2014) and considers recent law and economics scholarship on international litigation, investment arbitration and international commercial arbitration. As Professor Strong’s contribution shows, law and economics scholars are analyzing international dispute resolution from a variety of different perspectives and providing new insights into an extremely complex and important area of law.

Finally, Professor Strong will publish “Religious Rights in Historical, Theoretical and International Context: Hobby Lobby as a Jurisprudential Anomaly?” in volume 48 of the Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law early next year. This article, which incorporates elements of her award-winning doctoral dissertation, looks at the recent Hobby Lobby decision to consider whether and to what extent the majority opinion is consistent with international law and practice and with historical and theoretical rationales for religious liberty.

Tags: , , , ,