A European Taxonomy of International Arbitration: Doctrinal and Critical Reflections

The article critically discusses the stance of the European Union (EU) legal order towards international arbitration. By examining the case law of the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU), the article presents a European taxonomy of international arbitration, consisting of (1) commercial-contractual; (2) investment treaty-based; and (3) sports arbitration. It further analyses the taxonomy’s normative underpinnings, which are constitutional in nature and concern the autonomy of the EU legal order, the mutual trust between EU Member States, and the compliance of arbitral awards with EU public policy. In this light, the article argues that the EU-law position appears contextual and insufficiently doctrinally coherent: this points to the need for the CJEU to engage with the importance and function of international arbitration as a system of dispute settlement. In this sense, and within the existing EU constitutional framework, sanctioning a virtually unrestricted judicial review of awards ought to be avoided in favour of preserving the effectiveness of arbitration in Europe.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Arbitration.
Published
2026-02-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.54648/amdm2026016
Primary Topic
International Arbitration and Investment Law
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A European Taxonomy of International Arbitration: Doctrinal and Critical Reflections

Mark Konstantinidis
Arbitration.
International Arbitration and Investment Law
article

A European Taxonomy of International Arbitration: Doctrinal and Critical Reflections

Mark Konstantinidis
article en

Abstract

The article critically discusses the stance of the European Union (EU) legal order towards international arbitration. By examining the case law of the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU), the article presents a European taxonomy of international arbitration, consisting of (1) commercial-contractual; (2) investment treaty-based; and (3) sports arbitration. It further analyses the taxonomy’s normative underpinnings, which are constitutional in nature and concern the autonomy of the EU legal order, the mutual trust between EU Member States, and the compliance of arbitral awards with EU public policy. In this light, the article argues that the EU-law position appears contextual and insufficiently doctrinally coherent: this points to the need for the CJEU to engage with the importance and function of international arbitration as a system of dispute settlement. In this sense, and within the existing EU constitutional framework, sanctioning a virtually unrestricted judicial review of awards ought to be avoided in favour of preserving the effectiveness of arbitration in Europe.

Arbitration.Vol. 92(Issue 1)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 56%
International Arbitration and Investment Law
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.