Recent Publications

Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) as a Solution to Cross Border Consumer Disputes: The Enforcement of Outcomes

by Maxime Hanriot

Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) is an interesting means of giving online consumers efficient remedies in cross-border disputes. While the effectiveness of ODR is sometimes problematic, ad hoc solutions can be implemented depending on whether the ODR procedure is adjudicative or non-adjudicative, and whether the outcomes are binding or non-binding. This allows parties to seek enforcement before a court or a public authority, or to rely instead on private enforcement mechanisms. The analysis of each of these situations shows that the enforcement of binding outcomes obtained through ODR should be sustained by public regulation. However, important instruments such as the Rome I, Brussels I and Brussels I recast European Regulations prohibit pre-dispute ODR agreements, but this scenario might rapidly change thanks to the European ADR Directive. Efforts of this kind pave the way for greater trust in engaging in cross-border transactions and should be encouraged.

When the Arbitrator Creates the Conflict: Understanding Arbitrator Ethics through the IBA Guidelines on Conflict of Interest and Published Challenges

by James Ng

Arbitrator ethics is one of the most underdeveloped areas in international arbitration. Arbitrators are generally required to meet a baseline level of neutrality by disclosing any potential ethical conflicts and remaining independent and impartial throughout the arbitral process. Unfortunately, not all arbitral practice has met these ethical requirements. The “Application Lists” of the International Bar Association (IBA) Guidelines on Conflict of Interest in International Arbitration provide a theoretical basis for considering such ethical conflicts. This paper takes the “Application Lists” one step further: by matching them with published records of arbitrator challenges from the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA) and the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), the author will provide a practical scheme to gauge whether an ethical conflict merits disclosure or disqualification.

The Practice of States as Evidence of Custom: An Analysis of Fair and Equitable Treatment Standard Clauses in States' Foreign Investment Laws

by Patrick Dumberry

The article addresses a central question: did the fair and equitable treatment standard (FET) in investment regimes become a norm of customary international law? To answer this, Dumberry examines FET clauses in bilateral investment treaties and foreign investment laws of numerous states, as well as arbitral decisions involving allegations of breaches of FET obligations. His analysis shows that States have not engaged independently and consistently in the adoption of FET clauses. Consequently, Dumberry concludes that FET clauses cannot be considered customary international law.

Review and Analysis of Interim Measures Available to Foreign Arbitrators in Turkey

by Doğan Gültutan

Doğan Gültutan’s piece provides us with a detailed understanding of the legal rules on the granting of court-ordered interim measures in assistance to foreign arbitral proceedings in Turkey. In so doing, he underscores the crucial role played by courts in support of foreign arbitration, while also shedding light on the interactions between arbitral tribunals and Turkish courts. The author focuses on the types of relief available and the mechanisms triggering them, the procedure framing interim measures, counter-arguments that may be brought forth on appeal, enforcement of interim relief orders, and other ancillary issues.


Interested in submitting?


We look for well-written work that is interesting to our readership and advances or challenges the current state of scholarship in alternative dispute resolution.


There is no typical submission to the MJDR. We are a journal striving towards innovation and discourse between academics and practitioners. We accept classical academic manuscripts of between 5,000-8,000 words, case and practitioner comments between 3,000-5,000 words as well as works of original character upon agreement with the editorial board.


If you would like to publish with the MJDR please follow the Canadian Guide to Uniform Legal Citation, used by all major Canadian legal journals and accessible online.


Should you have more detailed inquiries about the publishing process, please contact our Coordinating Editor : or click here to find out more.

Latest Blog Posts

Please note that blogs are posted in the language of submission and are not translated.