Abstract
The impressive magnitude of cross-border transactions in the world dictates the continuous work on providing the corresponding efficient dispute resolution mechanisms. International commercial arbitration, although not free from problems, has proved to be the preferred model for such scenarios. In response to the needs of arbitration users, the leading jurisdictions and arbitration institutions regularly update their rules of the game.

Chinese arbitration system also develops continuously. Despite fierce competition, especially in the Asia region, China is never willing to give up its share. A number of improvements have been introduced to Chinese arbitration system recently. This article describes them, but also points to some important flaws of the system that are very likely to impact the image of China as an ideal place to arbitrate, and offers a few recommendations on how this image can be boosted and how China can come closer to the center of the stage of international commercial arbitration.

I. Introduction

Arbitration has for long been a preferred choice for cross-border disputes resolution. It has been so for a number of reasons. One of them is the existence of the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of the Foreign Arbitral Awards (“New York Convention”), which significantly streamlines the effective execution of foreign arbitral awards. The New York Convention has currently 156 contracting state parties, which shows the great chance of its application in the context of cross-border arbitration. So far, there has been no comparable treaty dealing with the enforcement of state court judgements. Another reason for arbitration preference is that arbitration is a neutral method where the parties can shape the proceeding to resolve a dispute according to their specific needs.

The popularity of arbitration in the cross-border dispute context has induced competition between various arbitration institutions and jurisdictions, both of which try to attract more cases and clients. As a consequence, internationalization has become one of the important patterns of arbitration. For example, Switzerland is one of the leaders in the international commercial arbitration race, where German is primarily spoken (with French, Italian and Romansh in some areas). Recently, the Swiss Supreme Court has considered English as a possible language for the proceeding of setting aside arbitral awards.

Nor is China being passive in developing and internationalizing its arbitration system, which is primarily built on Arbitration Law of the People's Republic of China (“China’s Arbitration Law”) from 1994. While the development of arbitration in mainland China over the last years is undeniable, there is still substantial room for improvement and the existing deficiencies are very likely to have negatively impacted the perception of China as a place to arbitrate.

This article first discusses the competitive environment in the area of cross-border dispute resolution. Next, it moves to the analysis of the recent developments of Chinese arbitration systems and the significance of the developments. Subsequently, it concentrates on some of the existing limitations of the Chinese system, which, in view of the author, significantly hinder the image of China as a place to arbitrate, especially when comparing the situation to the leading arbitration jurisdictions in the same region Hong Kong and Singapore. This article also seeks to offer some suggestions on the direction of changes China should take in order to boost its image in the highly competitive field of international commercial arbitration.