International Commercial Arbitration in the EU and the PRC : A Tale of Two Continents or 28 plus 3 Legal Systems

A first approach to the attitude maintained in the EU and the People’s Re-public of China (PRC) towards alternative dispute resolution (ADR) displays similitudes regarding the support that this movement receives in both places. However, and standing on this common acceptance, a deeper analysis of the existing situation in both regions highlights the existence of significant differences in relation to key aspects of ADR. Not only the final reasons underlying the support granted to ADR vary in China and Europe, also the extent of its acceptance, the understanding of the meaning of the several existing ADR devices and solutions embodied as regards them, the primacy awarded to each of them and the way they are actually implemented show relevant contrasts that affect their practical implementation and their future. Moreover, existing differences underpin the debate about the existence of a worldwide common understanding of ADR very much linked to the Western models of (i) dispute resolution, (ii) the valid coexistence of several approaches to this notion of ADR and (iii) the role played by international harmonization, at least in the field of international commercial arbitration. In this contribution we basically focus on international commercial arbitration. Our goal is not to provide a comprehensive study of the legal framework existing in the EU and the PRC. We want to stress some basic differential elements in order to understand and justify the different situation for arbitration in the EU and mainland China. In the first part of our work the existing legal framework of the institution in Europe and the PRC will be approached. In the second part we will stress some of the main differences arising out of that legal framework. Finally some practical suggestions for practitioners will be drawn up