Seat vs Venue In Arbitration: When Geography Does Not Determine Jurisdiction

In the world of arbitration, few distinctions are as doctrinally significant, yet as frequently misunderstood, as the difference between the “seat” and the “venue” of arbitration. While the seat determines the juridical home of the arbitration and identifies the court exercising supervisory jurisdiction, the venue is merely the physical location where hearings are held for convenience. Despite decades of judicial pronouncements clarifying this distinction, courts continue to conflate the two, leading to jurisdictional disputes that undermine the very certainty that arbitration seeks to provide. The question recurs with alarming regularity: does the place where the award is physically signed or the proceedings are conducted override the seat designated by the parties?