In early decisions, the French courts approached cases involving domestic and international commercial arbitration from distinctive doctrinal perspectives. Generally, they evidenced a more liberal and favorable attitude toward arbitration involving international commercial interests. In exclusively domestic cases, the courts showed greater reticence toward arbitration. In international disputes, however, the courts did not apply domestic law obstacles to arbitration. In contemporary litigation, this liberal judicial attitude toward international commercial arbitration has been maintained. Contemporary case law has made significant doctrinal advances, such as the courts' willingness to recognize the parties' intent to engage in arbitration. The chief innovation of contemporary case law, however, is the elaboration of the separability doctrine, which addresses the legal status of the arbitration clause as it relates to the principal contract. The French Supreme Court has ruled that an arbitration clause has an autonomous juridical character separate from the principal contract; consequently, its validity is not affected by the nullity of the principal contract. The paper provides English translations of seminal case opinions pertaining to French case law in international commercial arbitration. Sixty-two footnotes are provided.