Nowadays, arbitration is increasingly defined by its procedural flexibility and suitability to adapt to the needs and circumstances of different parties in different situations. In so being, arbitration employs the agreement to arbitrate as the device through which parties can utilise this procedural flexibility to create an exceptionally party-oriented process. Consequently, the drafting of these agreements and the choices concluded by the parties in them can very much determine whether a particular process is going to produce an efficient and effective outcome or rather frustrate the intentions of the parties and, generally, the objectives of international commercial arbitration. This thesis looks into the most influential decisions/choices made by the parties during the drafting stage of their arbitration agreements and attempts to underline the best practical and legal techniques to approach these decisions within today’s modern regulations of international commercial arbitration. The thesis begins its analysis by examining the separate procedural nature of arbitration agreements in comparison to the substantive nature of ordinary contracts. Such examination revealed that the separability of arbitration agreements produces certain consequences that can potentially uphold arbitration agreements in situations where the main contract was found illegal, non-existent, or invalid, for instance. A clear recognition of the distinct nature of arbitration agreements and the effects of that on the status of arbitration clauses, specifically, can provide the parties, from the very beginning, with rather precise expectations as to the future status of their arbitration agreement. In focus on the role of parties’ autonomy in producing timely awards, it was essential to analyse the different limitations that could restrict this autonomy and, possibly, frustrate the expectations and intentions of the parties. Such analysis revealed that these limitations were limited to incapacity, non-arbitrability, waiver of right to arbitrate, as well as public policy and mandatory rules of law. Finally, in scrutinising the most influential choices which parties can make in their arbitration agreement to positively and effectively create an intelligent international arbitration settlement, it was found that these choices mainly consisted of the choice of the seat of arbitration, the arbitrators, the language of the arbitration, and the law(s) applicable to the arbitration. Throughout this thesis, it is argued that through the consensual nature of international arbitration along with the autonomy bestowed upon its parties, the latter can have a better chance of achieving a practically and legally efficient settlement.

[pt] A partir da metáfora que sugere a figura híbrida do magistrado-mediador para dar nome ao recente – e crescente – movimento em que magistrados atuam diretamente em procedimentos autocompositivos enquanto mediadores e conciliadores, busca-se estudar a pertinência ou a impertinência dessa realidade e, para tanto, submete-se essa figura híbrida a três esferas de influência, com o objetivo de analisar as reações de compatibilidade: a esfera do próprio microssistema da autocomposição, a esfera da autonomia das partes que medeiam e a esfera do próprio magistrado que, após a sua atuação em autocomposição, terá que atuar em heterecomposição. Como percurso de investigação da (im)pertinência, o trabalho propõe três estágios de análise e o faz por meio do esquema realidade>>espelho<<simbólico, no qual a realidade representaria esse nosso lado do espelho, o mundo real do trabalho, da técnica, das leis, estruturas e sistemas, já o simbólico representaria o reflexo daquele lado do espelho, ou seja, as fontes mitológicas, simbólicas e literárias que formam o senso comum da figura do magistrado e, por fim, apresenta-se o próprio espelho como função de interpretação metodológica, na qual os referenciais teóricos de Habermas – juridificação e pressupostos da ação comunicativa - e Warat – noção de senso comum, influência e o peso do simbolismo jurídico e o estudo transdisciplinar da mediação como ferramenta emancipadora – desenvolvem o raciocínio que irá ajudar a construir as respostas sobre a (im)pertinência do magistrado-mediador nas ditas três esferas de influência. / [en] From the metaphor that suggests the hybrid figure of the judge-mediator to name the recent – and growing – movement in which judges act directly in selfcompositional procedures as mediators and conciliators, we begin to study the pertinence or impertinence of this reality and, for that, the hybrid figure is submitted to three spheres of influence, with the objective of analyzing the compatibility reactions: the sphere of the microsystem of self-composition, the sphere of autonomy of the parties that mediate and the sphere of the judge himself. that, after acting in self-composition, will have to act in heterocomposition. As a way of investigating (im)pertinence, the work proposes three stages of analysis and does so through the following scheme: reality>>mirror<<symbolic, through which reality represents our side of the mirror, the real world of work, technique, laws, structures and systems; the symbolic represents the reflection on that side of the mirror, that is, the mythological, symbolic and literary sources that form the common sense of the figure of the judge and, finally, the mirror is presented as a methodological interpretation function, through which the theoretical references of Habermas – juridification and presuppositions of communicative action - and Warat – concept of common sense, influence and the relevance of legal symbolism and the transdisciplinary study of mediation as an emancipating tool – develop the reasoning that will help to build the answers about the (im) pertinence of the judgemediator in the said three spheres of influence.