THE INFLUENCE OF THE UNCITRAL MODEL LAW ON DOMESTIC ARBITRATION REGIMES

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE UNITED KINGDOM AND THE UNITED STATES

Abstract

This article examines the relationship between the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration and domestic arbitration regimes through a comparative analysis of the United Kingdom and the United States. As a non-binding legislative template, the Model Law functions as a normative reference aimed at promoting harmonisation, party autonomy, limited judicial intervention, and the effectiveness of arbitral proceedings. Rather than focusing on formal implementation alone, the study explores different modes of engagement with the Model Law across distinct legal systems. The analysis demonstrates that, although the United Kingdom has not formally adopted the Model Law, the Arbitration Act 1996 reflects a significant normative alignment with its core principles. In contrast, the United States has incorporated the Model Law directly into its legal framework for international commercial arbitration through Chapter 3 of the Federal Arbitration Act. By comparing these two approaches, the article highlights how shared arbitration standards may be achieved through both legislative adoption and autonomous domestic regulation. Focusing on judicial intervention, interim measures, and the setting aside and enforcement of arbitral awards, the study illustrates the adaptability of the Model Law within different legal cultures. The findings suggest that the Model Law’s continued relevance lies in its flexibility and its capacity to function as a common reference point for the development of international arbitration law across jurisdictions.