Arbitration is presently the most common way for states, people, and organisations to settle international disputes. As a result of increased globalisation of world trade and investment, specialised international arbitration practitioners who speak a common procedural language, whether they practise in England, Switzerland, Nigeria, Singapore, or Brazil, have become increasingly harmonised in their arbitration practises. And in recent times, international arbitration plays a key role in resolving cross border commercial disputes as there is no involvement of national courts which clearly indicates that there is no biasness in the procedure and award.
These standardised practises are based on complex arbitration rules administered by organisations such as the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), the American Arbitration Association (AAA), and the London Court of Arbitration Centre, which are located throughout Europe, Asia, the Middle East, and elsewhere. The standardised rules are themselves supported by enlightened national arbitration laws inspired by the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITAL) Model Law. The purpose was to maximize the effectiveness of the arbitral process and to minimize the judicial intervention.
The result is a powerful edifice of laws and procedures, backed up by treaties like New York convention 1958, which impose an obligation on national courts around the world to recognise and enforce both arbitration agreements and arbitration award.
The awards and the procedure followed by such institution greatly affect the procedure followed by the national courts. As it helps the national court to adopt flexible rules and modify their existing laws if there is any inconsistent. Such development in the national court can help the arbitrational process to be speedy mechanism.
In this paper we are going to analysis first different types of international arbitration institution and secondly how they different from each other on different aspect.