English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

This article attempts to explain,in the broader framework of dispute resolution,the relative importance of arbitration for Japanese businesses in international commercial disputes as contrasted with the negligible role of arbitration in processing domestic disputes.The article concludes that the availability and normativeness of hanashi-ai coupled with some other factors determine whether arbitration is a reasonable alternative for Japanese corporations to utilize in a given dispute situation.Finally it will be suggested that new legislation may be a plausible way to prompte arbitration as alternative dispute resolution for both domestic and international disputes.Update as of 2011: This article was published in 1987, which updated my prior article under the same title appeared in Osaka University Law Review, No.33 (1986). The new Act of Arbitration (Law No. 138 of 2003) is now in force. This Act is modeled after the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration of 1985. However commercial arbitration is not the frequent resort in Japan to settle commercial disputes, both for international and domestic commercial cases.From 2000 to 2008,The Japan Commercial Arbitration Association received the average of 13 requests per year.

Some Aspects of the Use of Commercial Arbitration by Japanese Corporations