Comparative Analysis of Dispute Resolution Mechanisms: Law Assignment

This essay provides a comparative analysis of international dispute resolution mechanisms. It begins with an introduction to the era of globalization and the role of international bodies like the ICJ and WTO in resolving disputes. The essay then delves into the dispute resolution processes of the ICJ and the WTO's Dispute Settlement Body (DSB), highlighting their roles, jurisdictions, and limitations. Subsequently, it compares these processes with those of the High Court of Australia and the Australian Centre for International Commercial Arbitration (ACICA), focusing on their structures, services, and specializations. The essay concludes by summarizing the key differences between these dispute resolution methods, emphasizing the varied approaches to resolving international and commercial disputes. The essay utilizes several sources to support its arguments, including websites, and case laws.

Running Head: Law 1
Law

Law 2
Introduction:
It must be noted that this era is considered as unique era of internationalization or globalization.
With the increasing trend and improvement of technology, transportation, and communication,
the nations of the world now resolve their dispute in more peaceful manner. For this purpose,
United Nations established International Court of Justice1.
On the other hand, WTO play key role in resolving trade disputes. Dispute between two member
governments are resolved by the WTO, and because of this it is considered as best dispute
settlement body in the world2.
In this paper, comparison is done between the dispute resolution process of ICJ and DSB with
the High Court of Australia, and the Australian Centre for International Commercial Arbitration.
Subsequently, paper is concluded with brief conclusion.
Dispute resolution in ICJ and DSB:
International Court of Justice is the judicial body to be subordinate of the United Nations, and it
must be noted that statute of ICJ is the integral part of the charter of the organization and
members of the United Nations are also the members of the special system of the Court. ICJ is
also considered as the principle judicial organ of the United Nations. However, this body is open
for the all states of the international community. ICJ determines all the aspects of public
international law, but still it is the effective jurisdiction which remains constrained.
1 Law Teacher. International Court Of Justice And International Disputes International Law Essay,
https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/international-law/international-court-of-justice-and-international-
disputes-international-law-essay.php, Accessed on 2nd October 2017.
2 WTO. A unique contribution, https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/whatis_e/tif_e/disp1_e.htm, Accessed on
2nd October 2017.

Law 3
ICJ is the primary mean for resolving the disputes between the states, and this Court is well
recognized for its significant contribution in the international law development. However, Court
has not operated in full capacity because of which almost 4 or 5 cases of ICJ are referred to the
Court for judicial settlement every year. There are number of reasons of ineffectiveness of ICJ,
and the most important reason is the character of Court itself. It is the common notion that
limited nature in context of Court jurisdiction is the most important clause of court’s
ineffectiveness3.
ICJ includes almost 15 judges which are elected by general assembly of the United Nations and
also by its security council for nine years. For the seats in ICJ elections are done in every three
years, and re-nomination of retired judges is also done. Members of the states are independent
judges and they do not represent their governments.
Court will deal with the disputes arise between states, and does not consider any disputes which
arise between individuals and private bodies. Court shall also consider any issue or dispute by
presenting both the parties to the dispute opposite each other. Additionally, it must be noted that
jurisdiction of the Court is optional.
Generally, it must be noted that ICJ play two roles first it settles dispute as per the international
law arise between two states and second it gives advisory opinions related to legal questions
referred by international organs and agencies.
On the other hand, DSB of WTO mainly resolves dispute related to broken promises and
members of WTO also preferred multilateral system for the purpose of settling disputes instead
3 David A. Gantz. Dispute Settlement Under the NAFTA and the
WTO: Choice of Forum Opportunities and Risks
for the NAFTA Parties, < http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?
article=1328&context=auilr>, Accessed on 2nd October 2017.

Law 4
of taking unilateral action. In other words, states are bound by the agreed procedures and
judgments4.
The international Court of Justice was introduced for fulfilling the need of international judicial
settlement and on other side WTO was introduced for the purpose of promoting trade at
international level by reducing tariffs and removing other trade barriers related to trade.
Difference is also stated between resolutions of disputes such as ICJ adopted process of
arbitration by referring cases and in WTO there is voluntary submission of dispute by both the
parties when they break any contract exists between them and need external assistance for
solving the issue5.
Dispute resolution in High Court of Australia and ACICA:
Australia’s leading international dispute resolution body is Australian Centre for International
Commercial Arbitration (ACICA) which was established in 1985. This body is established as not
for profit organization. The main aim of ACICA is to promote and facilitate efficient resolution
of commercial disputes in Australia ad also at international level through arbitration and
mediation with the aim of delivering expertise through their process. This body is governed by
board including some leading international arbitration practitioners of Australia.
It must be noted that, board and membership of ACICA extends to business, academia, judiciary,
industry, and government. However, this body also signs co-operation agreement with almost 30
arbitral bodies. It is also the founding member of Asia Pacific Regional Arbitration Group and
4 Clayton UTZ. A Guide To International Arbitration, <
https://www.claytonutz.com/ArticleDocuments/178/Clayton-Utz-Guide-to-International-Arbitration-
2012.pdf.aspx?Embed=Y>, Accessed o 2nd October 2017.
5 Turki Al Saud. A comparison between the dispute settlementprocedures in the international court of justice and
the world trade organization, < http://bura.brunel.ac.uk/bitstream/2438/4477/1/FulltestThesis.pdf>, Accessed on
2nd October 2017.

Law 5
also the member of International Federation of Commercial Arbitration Institutions. Services of
ACICA include6:
 ACICA must act as appointing and administering body for all the forms of ADR and it is
impartial in nature. It has its own set of rules as well as ad hoc process which includes in
UNCITRAL and Arbitration Rules.
 ACICA maintains the international panels of arbitrators and meditators, and these panels
can be used as a source for party appointments.
 ACICA provides clauses related to rules and models for the purpose of facilitating best
practice in the arbitration and mediation conduct.
 It also assists the parties in arranging the facilities for managing their ADR processes
which includes room hire and transcription services.
 It acts as deposit holder for tribunal and mediator fees while processing in ADR which
also includes those cases which are administered under other rules of administration7.
Specialties of ACICA:
There are number of appeals which are established by international commercial court in
Australia, and as per one recent publication of Honours Chief Justice Warren and Justice Croft of
the Supreme Court of Victoria, there is requirement of establishing other options too which are
different from arbitration for international commercial disputes.
6 ACICA, Arbitration, https://acica.org.au/arbitration/, Accessed on 2nd October 2017.
7 Linked In. ACICA, < https://in.linkedin.com/company/australian-centre-for-international-commercial-arbitration>,
Accessed on 2nd October 2017.

Law 6
This can be understood through case which was recently handed down by SICC, BCBC
Singapore Pte Ltd v PT Bayan Resources TBK [2016] SGHC(I) 018. In this case, dispute was
related to construction of coal processing facility in Indonesia and it also involves parties from
three different jurisdictions that were Indonesia, Australia and Singapore. At time when disputes
was related to cross border transactions which were complex in nature then such cases were
usually resolved through international arbitration. Decision made by SICC in this case result in
more parties resolve the case through international commercial Courts9.
Conclusion:
After considering above facts, it is clear that process of dispute resolution of ICJ and DSB of
WTO is completely different with the process of ACICA. ICJ and ACICA mainly concentrate on
resolving the dispute with peaceful manner and deals with commercial matters. On the other
hand WTO resolves dispute when states break any promises and both parties file dispute with
states.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Websites
8 BCBC Singapore Pte Ltd v PT Bayan Resources TBK [2016] SGHC(I) 01.
9 Andrew Stephenson. IS AN INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL COURT FOR AUSTRALIA A VIABLE OPTION,
http://www.corrs.com.au/thinking/insights/is-an-international-commercial-court-for-australia-a-viable-option/?
utm_source=Mondaq&utm_medium=syndication&utm_campaign=View-Original, Accessed on 2nd October 2017.

Law 7
Law Teacher. International Court Of Justice And International Disputes International Law Essay,
https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/international-law/international-court-of-justice-and-
international-disputes-international-law-essay.php, Accessed on 2nd October 2017.
WTO. A unique contribution, https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/whatis_e/tif_e/disp1_e.htm,
Accessed on 2nd October 2017.
David A. Gantz. Dispute Settlement Under the NAFTA and the WTO: Choice of Forum
Opportunities and Risks
for the NAFTA Parties, < http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?
article=1328&context=auilr>, Accessed on 2nd October 2017.
Clayton UTZ. A Guide To International Arbitration, <
https://www.claytonutz.com/ArticleDocuments/178/Clayton-Utz-Guide-to-International-
Arbitration-2012.pdf.aspx?Embed=Y>, Accessed o 2nd October 2017.
Turki Al Saud. A comparison between the dispute settlement procedures in the international
court of justice and the world trade organization, <
http://bura.brunel.ac.uk/bitstream/2438/4477/1/FulltestThesis.pdf>, Accessed on 2nd October
2017.
ACICA, Arbitration, https://acica.org.au/arbitration/, Accessed on 2nd October 2017.
Linked In. ACICA, < https://in.linkedin.com/company/australian-centre-for-international-
commercial-arbitration>, Accessed on 2nd October 2017.
Andrew Stephenson. is an international commercial court for Australia a viable option,
http://www.corrs.com.au/thinking/insights/is-an-international-commercial-court-for-australia-a-
viable-option/?utm_source=Mondaq&utm_medium=syndication&utm_campaign=View-
Original, Accessed on 2nd October 2017.
Case Law
BCBC Singapore Pte Ltd v PT Bayan Resources TBK [2016] SGHC(I) 01.