TYPES OF ARBITRAL PROCEEDINGS IN WORLD PRACTICE: THEORY AND PRACTICE

This article undertakes a comprehensive doctrinal and comparative-legal analysis of the principal types of arbitral proceedings that have developed in world commercial and investment practice. Relying on the foundational works of leading arbitration scholars, the arbitration rules of the world's principal institutions, and a body of landmark arbitral and judicial decisions, the article classifies arbitration according to several intersecting criteria: the mode of institutional support (institutional versus ad hoc), the subject-matter of the dispute (commercial versus investment), the procedural timeframe (ordinary versus expedited), the medium of the proceedings (traditional versus online/digital), and the degree of sectoral specialization (maritime, construction and sports arbitration). For each type, the article identifies the governing normative instruments, examines representative case law, and contrasts the positions taken by different schools of arbitration scholarship. Particular attention is paid to the practical and legislative situation in the Republic of Uzbekistan, whose Law "On International Commercial Arbitration" and Law "On Arbitration Courts" are assessed against the benchmarks set by the UNCITRAL Model Law and the practice of leading arbitral seats. The authors conclude that no single taxonomy of arbitration is self-sufficient, that the boundaries between the recognized types are increasingly porous, and that Uzbekistan's arbitration reform would benefit from a more explicit statutory recognition of expedited and online procedures, together with a more robust judicial culture of minimal, pro-arbitration intervention. The article puts forward a set of concrete legislative and institutional recommendations addressed to the further development of Uzbek arbitration law and practice.