Globalisation has not merely transformed the world into a global village for social interaction; it has fundamentally reconfigured the architecture of international commerce. The increasing interdependence of economies has led to a proliferation of cross-border contracts for the purchase and supply of goods and services. Central to this commercial expansion is maritime transportation, which remains the dominant medium for the movement of goods in international trade. Indeed, carriage of goods by sea is not simply historical; it is indispensable to contemporary global commerce. Maritime transactions, by their very nature, involve multiple actors across jurisdictions, including shipowners, charterers, cargo interests, insurers, financiers, and port authorities. Consequently, maritime contracts are inherently international and legally complex.
Given this complexity, disputes are inevitable. The critical issue is not the occurrence of disputes but the mechanism by which they are resolved. In international commercial practice, partyautonomy has emerged as a foundational principle. Parties are generally free to determine the governing law of their contractand the forum for dispute resolution, i.e. whether disputes should be resolved through litigation or Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), particularly arbitration. This autonomy is not merely procedural convenience; it underpins predictability, commercial certainty, and risk allocation in international trade. The enforcement of forum selection and arbitration clauses has therefore become a cornerstone of modern transnational commerce.
DOES ARBITRATION OUST ADMIRALTY JURISDICTION? RE-EXAMINING SECTION 20 OF THE ADMIRALTY JURISDICTION ACT 1991
