---

In the United States, outgrowing the old judicial hostility towards arbitration, there is a strong federal presumption that disputes are capable of settlement by arbitration. Concerning the scope of arbitrability, any doubts regarding whether an issue is capable of settlement by arbitration should be resolved in favor of arbitration. With respect to United States precedents, only a few categories of claims relevant to international and domestic commercial transactions remain non-arbitrable. Focus is put on the evolution of the scope of arbitrability with respect to the most frequently excluded areas such as disputes falling within the realms of family law, intellectual and industrial property rights, tort claims, insolvency, employment, consumer claims and bankruptcy, coming to the conclusion that the United States is well past the time when judicial suspicion of the desirability of arbitration and of the competence of arbitral tribunals inhibited the development of arbitration as an alternative means of dispute resolution.

---

The author is J.D. (PPKE), LL.M. (CEU) in international business law, practice areas include EU law, energy/environmental law and wine law, working as Chief Adviser in the public administration.

---