The contemplation about the international commercial arbitration as an effective measure to the

traditional court system is always in question. But in the present time savvy world of businesses,
arbitration process started to look appealing for its cost cutting ability and fair results. Moreover the
commercial arbitration is more sought for its flexibility to appoint a neutral person who has some
specific knowledge and expertise over the subject matter in dispute unlike in traditional court
practices where it takes ages for it to decide on the specific commercial oriented issues. Though
arbitration procedure has become the dominant method of settling international disputes outside the
court, it definitely needs legislative interventions and court assistance for its effective functioning.
The recent survey undertaken by Queen Mary university of London has revealed the emerging trends
in international arbitration. The survey revealed that that 88 per cent of the participating corporations
had used arbitration and 86 per cent of corporate counsel revealed they were satisfied with
international arbitration, with 18 per cent very satisfied. This apparent popularity of international
arbitration is also reflected by empirical data from the world's largest international arbitration bodies.
For example, the ICC had a 10 per cent increase in cases filed from 2007 to 2008, while the HKIAC
and LCIA had increases of 34.38 per cent and 15.33 per cent respectively in the same period". In
view of the above statistics it is clearly evident that the commercial business has started to embrace
arbitration not only for its enduring advantages but also for the quick and speed results it delivers and
also to end the dispute early which saves lot of money for the both the parties. There are two types of
arbitration, in which ad-hoc arbitration has the arbitration agreement specifying the selection of rules,
appointment of the arbitrators, powers of arbitrators. The UNCITRAL model law is chosen for its
flexibility. The law based on UNCITRAL model law accords importance to party autonomy,
severability of the arbitration clause and competence of the arbitral tribunal. The other major
international arbitration institutions are doing well in deed. The rules and procedure followed by the
institutions are providing coherence with substance and procedure in arbitration. They are still
protecting the distinct feature of the arbitration by adapting themselves to the newer technological
trend and other evolving needs. The major institutions are

International chamber of Commerce (ICC) Paris,

American Arbitration Association (AAA), New York,

London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA) London

Swiss Arbitration Association (ASA)

Kuala Lumpur Regional centre for Arbitration (KLRCA)

The international Chamber of Commerce (ICC) is the premier institution of arbitration in the present
world. It is not a court of law but administrative body for arbitrations in ICC. The American
Arbitration Association (AAA) is not the typical institution or centre for promotion of arbitration and
conduct of arbitral proceedings. It is a non serving as a non-profit organisation currently. The (SWA)
is the long standing host of the Switzerland for arbitration proceedings under the ICC Rules. It is not a
arbitral institution and it follows no specific rules and it is a non profit organisation. The KLRCA is
established in 1978 and is been supported by Malaysian government and it is not a agency or branch
of the government. It is consultative organisation for to provide a forum for settlement of disputes by
arbitration in trade, commerce and investment in the Asia-pacific region.

It is no doubt that that international commercial arbitration is more often sought for settlement of
disputes out of court but one must also bear in mind the difficulty in challenging and enforcing the
international commercial awards with the growing influence of the state legislatures and the courts.
The New York Convention is silent in relation to the matters that may be considered by a court upon
the bringing of a challenge to an arbitral award at the seat of arbitration. Thus, the extent to which a
commercial arbitral award may be challenged at a particular seat will depend upon the legislation
promulgated by the relevant legislature". The states interpret the New York convention principles
according to the principles of their constitution and also the governing domestic law. The legislations
imposed cause hurdles to the enforcement of awards which are refused to be enforced stating that they
are against the public policy. Therefore there is lack of co-ordination between courts and legislation
which is major concern for enforcement of arbitral awards in a foreign state.

The steady growths of international trade across the globe will definitely vouch for arbitration and
thereby can expect a steep increase in arbitration cases. The future of international arbitration may
well depend, at least in part, on the ability of arbitrators, signatories to arbitration agreements, and
courts to maintain the integrity of the international arbitral process." The ad hoc or international
arbitration cannot serve the purpose unless proper training is given to the arbitrators and counsel who
conduct it. The arbitrators must be mindful of the objectives which the parties to the arbitration desire
to achieve and try to cater to their needs and thereby ensuring the growth and popularity to increase in
the coming years. The counsel to the arbitration proceedings needs to be chosen who specialises in
international arbitration and have sound knowledge of the subject matter of the dispute and a person
who can cater to the needs of the party with some regional and local law knowledge. The reputation
and availability of the counsel also plays an important role. Therefore it is proposed to have long
standing relationship with the specialist arbitration firms by the corporations for representing in the
international commercial arbitrations. With regards to the non coherence of the legislations and
national courts, it is proposed that a new International Arbitration court of appeal of enforcement is to
be established by United Nations convention. As its name suggests, the Appeal and Enforcement
Court would have the authority to consider the issues now considered by courts at the seat of the
arbitration as well as the matters considered by courts at the place, or places, of enforcement." It
therefore reduce the risk of national court or the home court of the either parties cannot impose their
will on the outcome of international dispute and thereby subsequent delays in interpreting the award
can be cut down and this would work advantageous to cut the expenses involved in the enforcement
of the process. The establishment of a new Appeal and enforcement no way undermines the authority
of the national courts or in contravention to the New York convention rules; it only serves as an
option to the parties to arbitrate their dispute under New York Convention rules or a self contained
system which minimises the interference of the national courts. It is further asserted that the support
of the national court would is definitely vital for the smooth functioning of the process and to protect
the integrity of international arbitration.