This is a thesis which was published as Vol. 5 of the publications of the Institute for the Law of the Sea and Maritime Commercial Law of the University of Hamburg. This series now comprises a considerable number of very valuable contributions to topics of the maritime law. The book’s subtitle is: “Study of comparative law which considers the modification of the law in England, France and Germany, as well as the legal situation in New York.” The first part of the book is, from a practical point of view, most interesting. The author has asked 148 German shipping firms to answer a questionnaire containing nine questions. They are: In which maritime contract do you agree upon arbitration? How often had your firm to proceed to arbitration within the last five years? According to your experience, what are the decisive factors of arbitration in a number of given venues? How are your arbitration agreements worded? Do you usually agree upon a specific substantive law to apply and upon specific arbitration rules? How many arbitrators are you used to agree upon, how are they appointed and do they have to have a certain qualification? Did you experience difficulties when enforcing an award? What are the reasons for you to favour arbitration? According to your experience, is arbitration more expensive or cheaper than litigation? Forty-two answers were to the effect that London is the most important venue for arbitration, 34 favoured Hamburg, 27 New York, seven Paris. Moreover, the firms gave their opinion on the length of proceedings at these places, on the costs and expenses to be paid, on the general character of the awards (meeting the concern of the shipping practice?) etc. Criticisms were expressed on various places. Eighty per cent of the answers were in favour of arbitration instead of litigation, with the exception of England, where notably 20% preferred litigation (in addition to 16% who in general preferred litigation). A lot of answers said that arbitration in London is rather expensive.