Comity, International Dispute Resolution Agreements, and the Supreme Court

Georgetown Journal of International Law, Vol. 21, p. 333, 1990

33 Pages Posted: 17 Nov 2011  

Steven R. Swanson

Hamline University - School of Law

Date Written: January 1, 1990

Abstract

The massive expansion of global contacts in the twentieth century has mandated the creation of dispute resolution mechanisms for international business conflicts. This article traces the development of the comity doctrine by examining the three Conventions and the cases which interpret them. It first offers a brief historical background of the problems faced by international litigators prior to the existence of international dispute resolution mechanisms, and then examines how the three Conventions addressed these problems. The article next looks at the Supreme Court cases that challenged each Convention. It then criticizes the Supreme Court’s lack of analytical consistency in deciding these cases, and goes on to discuss the advantages of the comity doctrine, ultimately applying the doctrine to each of the cases as the author believes the Supreme Court should have applied it. It is hoped that this study will assist the courts in creating a healthier environment for the further development of international dispute resolution mechanisms.

Keywords: Comity doctrine, Conventions, international dispute resolution, international law, United Nations Convention, Hague Convention

Suggested Citation

Swanson, Steven R., Comity, International Dispute Resolution Agreements, and the Supreme Court (January 1, 1990). Georgetown Journal of International Law, Vol. 21, p. 333, 1990. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1955652

Steven R. Swanson (Contact Author)

Hamline University - School of Law ( email )

1536 Hewitt Avenue
Saint Paul, MN 55104-1237
United States

Paper statistics

Downloads
23
Abstract Views
470