The doctrine of res judicata, a fundamental principle ensuring the finality of judicial decisions, has become increasingly significant in international commercial arbitration as cross-border disputes proliferate and arbitration emerges as the preferred dispute resolution mechanism. This paper examines the application of res judicata to international arbitral awards, analyzing the tension between traditional domestic law approaches and emerging autonomous transnational principles. Through a comprehensive review of contemporary scholarship and arbitral practice, this research demonstrates that the current reliance on domestic law through conflict-of-laws analysis produces unpredictability and inconsistency, undermining the efficiency and certainty that parties seek in arbitration. The paper advocates for an autonomous approach grounded in party autonomy and arbitrators' inherent powers, proposing broad preclusive effects that encompass claim preclusion, issue preclusion, and abuse of process doctrines. The final section explores the implementation of these principles within Uzbekistan's evolving legal framework, offering recommendations for legislative reform and judicial practice to align Uzbek arbitration law with international best practices while respecting the country's civil law tradition.

res judicata, re-litigation, issue estoppel, abuse of process, identity of parties, cause of action, the triple identity test, international arbitration, conflict-of-laws, public policy, Uzbekistan.

Brozolo, L. (2024). Too Much Domestic Law in International Arbitration: The Case of Arbitral Res Judicata, American University Business Law Review, 13(1), pp. 123-140. https://aulawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2024/10/Vol.%2013.1/4_Di%20Brozolo_ BLR13.1.pdf?_t=1729186246

Brozolo, L. & Ponzano, F. (2024), How to assess the res judicata effects of international arbitral awards: giving concreteness to an autonomous approach, Arbitration International, (40)4, pp. 409-444. https://doi.org/10.1093/arbint/aiae020

Ezurmendia, A. (2020). Res Judicata: A Gap Between Civil Litigation and Arbitration? Nottingham Law Journal, 28(2), pp. 30-52. https://www.ntu.ac.uk/media/documents/academic-schools/law/NLJ-Vol28-2-2020_Text-2ndREV.pdf

Lanser, M. (2019). The Notion of Res Judicata in Investor-State Arbitration. International In-house Counsel Journal, 12(46), pp. 1-18. https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?han dle=hein.journals/iihcj12&collection=journals&id=103&startid=&endid=120

Schaffstein, S. (2012). The Doctrine of Res Judicata before International Arbitral Tribunals. Doctoral dissertation. University of London. https://qmro.qmul.ac.uk/xmlui/bitstream/ handle/123456789/8665/Schaffstein_S_PhD_Final.pdf

Cavallini, C. & Ariano, E. (2021). "Issue Preclusion out of the U.S. (?): The Evolution of the Italian Doctrine of Res Judicata in Comparative Context. Indiana Int'l & Comp. Law Review, 31(1). https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3818756

Nazzini, R. (2018). Enforcement of International Arbitral Awards: Res Judicata, Issue Estoppel, and Abuse of Process in a Transnational Context, The American Journal of Comparative Law, 66(3), pp. 603-638. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26613297

Prager, D. et al. (2024). Report on Res Judicata in International Arbitration. International Bar Association (IBA), 2024. https://www.ibanet.org/Res-judicata-in-international-arbitration

Ghosh, V. (2015). An uncertain shield: res judicata in arbitration, Arbitration International, 31(4), pp. 661-668, https://doi.org/10.1093/arbint/aiv058

Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan “On International Commercial Arbitration” (2021). https://lex.uz/docs/5698676

Economic Procedure Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan (2018). https://lex.uz/docs/3523895.