Recent years have witnessed exponential growth in the number of arbitrations seated and administered by arbitral institutions in the Asia-Pacific region. Asia has been increasing its influence in the global ADR market; today, many countries in the region have firmly marked themselves on the international arbitration map as major players. Headquartered in Beijing, the CIETAC maintains the momentum of the sharp increase in terms of caseload, with 3615 cases administered in 2020 alone, crossing the championship leaderboard among all arbitral institutions. A hallmark of international arbitration is that different jurisdictions and arbitral institutions approach things differently, and the tribunal secretaries’ practice is no exception. This note explores the current position of the arbitral institutions in respect of tribunal secretaries, with a brief overview on Asian practices and a closer look at the two biggest Asian arbitral institutions, China International Economics and Trade Ar

This paper introduces the concept of an “arbitration eager”jurisdiction and sets out principal criteria that could be used to describe the term. The author analyses and discusses the recent development of international commercial arbitration industry in South Korea as a prime example of a jurisdiction that matches the description of the concept.

The author examines whether states are still in a position to control arbitration, and what specific steps could be made to slow down the process of such rapid growth of the popularity and use of international arbitration by private parties. He argues that the state's legal intervention might become an obstacle to further development of international arbitration, whilst, as demonstrated, certain nations had been more successful in implementing such measures of preventive nature than others. The author chooses Russia as an example of a state having a consistently negative reaction to arbitration, and delves into detailed reasons of such a reaction.