An Analysis of Jordanian Jurisdiction as a Seat for International Arbitration

In: Arab Law Quarterly
Zaid M. AladwanInternational commercial lawyer; University of Sussex, Brighton, Sussex, UK

Search for other papers by Zaid M. Aladwan in
Google Scholar
Mutaz M. AladwanLLM Candidate, University of Bournemouth, Bournemouth, United Kingdom

Search for other papers by Mutaz M. Aladwan in
Google Scholar
Download Citation Get Permissions

Access options

Get access to the full article by using one of the access options below.

Institutional Login

Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials

Login via Institution


Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):



Arbitration is the best method to resolve a dispute, due to the flexibility in its mechanism and issuing of a final judgment, known as an ‘award’. The winning party usually seeks to apply that award in the state where the assets of the losing party exist. In this regard, the New York Convention 1958 guarantees that the award is enforceable in the state where the winning party sought to apply. Jordan is party to the Convention; it has regulated its own arbitration law and has adopted the UNCITRAL Model Law 1985. However, not all provisions were adopted where specific provisions in Jordanian law relating to certain matters differed from the Model Law provisions. These differences may positively or adversely affect the arbitration procedure in Jordan.

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 387 161 12
Full Text Views 9 3 0
PDF Views & Downloads 27 12 0