Thesis (M.A.)--City University of Hong Kong, 2006. / "Master of Arts in arbitration and dispute resolution, LW6409 Research project" Title from PDF t.p. (viewed on May 22, 2007) Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (M.A.)--City University of Hong Kong, 2006. / "MA arbitration and dispute resolution, City University of Hong Kong, dissertation (LW 6409)" Title from PDF t.p. (viewed on May 22, 2007) Includes bibliographical references.

This thesis addresses the question of how conventions and other instruments regulating court jurisdiction should deal with court proceedings relating to arbitration. It argues that the conventional approach of excluding court proceedings related to arbitration entirely from the scope of the jurisdiction instrument cannot be justified with reference to any international arbitration convention. It continues to argue that the exclusion of arbitration causes or exacerbates significant problems at the interface between the courts and arbitration, taking the European Union’s recent experience as an example. It then argues that the European legislature has recently directly considered the exclusion of arbitration from its jurisdictional instruments and failed to act effectively. Any amendments to this system will necessarily be offered within the relevant legal context, so an assessment of the prevailing principles in European international private law and international commercial arbitration will follow. Furthermore, the ongoing debate surrounding the delocalisation of arbitration and its relevance to the debate about the interface between court jurisdiction and arbitration shall be addressed. Finally, this thesis proposes a model for inclusion of arbitration in the European jurisdiction instrument (the Brussels I Regulation) that would, it is argued, solve or ameliorate the problems at the interface between the Regulation and arbitration, whilst broadly aligning with the prevailing principles in the relevant legal context. The thesis then considers whether this approach could be extended beyond Europe to the world at large, concluding that it could not. This work therefore takes an original approach to a topic of much contemporary controversy, by taking a holistic, rounded, and reasoned view of the problems at the interface between court jurisdiction and arbitration. It also contains original insights into several other areas, including the historical justification for the exclusion of arbitration from jurisdiction conventions, the importance of mutual trust as a founding principle of the common market, the relevance of the delocalisation debate to the topic, and the proposal for reform advanced at the end of this thesis.

Due to the influence of the construction industry on the country’s economy, resolution of disputes is very important. The Arbitration Act 1996 was passed to remedy the complaints that had made arbitration unpopular. Comments from academics and practitioners indicated that construction arbitration remained unpopular and procedural innovation anticipated had not materialised. This study considers arbitration in the construction industry in England and Wales and evaluates its use and role since the passing of the Arbitration Act 1996. It also explores the potential use of arbitration against the use of litigation, statutory adjudication, mediation and expert determination having regard to variables of size of claim and dispute. A pragmatic theoretical perspective was followed, using a survey strategy. Initially a quantitative methodology was used, with structured questionnaires sent to users of arbitration, their legal advisers and construction arbitrators. To provide extension and clarification of matters revealed from questionnaires, interviews were conducted with construction arbitrators and construction lawyers, thereby incorporating a qualitative methodology. The study shows a significant decline in the use of construction arbitration, but comparing the two periods investigated, there was less of a decline for the more recent period, compared to the earlier period. As a dispute resolution method, arbitration was considered neutral, being neither poor, nor excellent. Arbitration’s standing, overall, is poor; however, for claims between £1 million and £10 million it is similar to the other methods referred to above. Positive influences towards choosing arbitration are that arbitration is private, providing fairness, allowing control of the process with an award that is final. Negative influences are that arbitration is costly, complex with procedures styled on litigation, subject to delays and confidence issues with arbitrators’ decisions. Cost and duration of arbitration remain the most problematic features, however the investigation suggests that users and particularly their lawyer advisers are reluctant to implement cost saving procedures.

in English The Binding Effect of Arbitral Awards in International Investment Disputes The purpose of this thesis is to analyse binding effect an award has on parties to the dispute and most importantly on future tribunals. Further discussed is the de facto precedent and its development in international investment treaty arbitration. Theoretical research is supported by an empirical study of case law. The reason for my research is the existence of conflicting awards in international investment law which undermines legal certainty of investors and States. The thesis is divided into three parts. The first part is introductory and concerns with the general characteristics of international investment dispute. This part describes the system of bilateral treaties for the reciprocal encouragement of investment and the dispute mechanism in which investors are left with a choice before which body the dispute will be heard. The chapter then distinguishes two different perceptions of tribunals: the principal-agent relationship where tribunal acts only as an agent of parties to the dispute independent of other tribunals; and tribunal as an agent of parties and also agent of the whole investment community. The second chapter focuses on the binding nature of an award. It looks at the wording of ICSID Convention...

Par un étonnant paradoxe, le contrôle étatique des sentences arbitrales internationales conduit à réintroduire la justice étatique là où les parties avaient voulu l’exclure. Mais ce paradoxe pourrait n’être qu’apparent. Une approche fondée sur la distinction entre les intérêts publics et les intérêts privés ouvre de nouvelles perspectives. L’examen réalisé par le juge étatique l’invite à s’assurer, d’une part, du respect par les arbitres des intérêts privés des parties et, d’autre part, à contrôler la compatibilité de la sentence avec ses intérêts publics. Aussi paraît-il concevable que l’intérêt en cause puisse modifier directement la nature du contrôle exercé. Parallèlement, le juge compétent est tantôt indirectement désigné par les parties, tantôt déterminé par le lieu d’exécution de la sentence. Par conséquent, il est légitime d’assigner aux juges de l’annulation et de l’exequatur une mission distincte, mais complémentaire. Le juge de l’annulation examinerait les intérêts privés et le juge de l’exequatur garantirait la conformité de la sentence aux intérêts publics. En définitive, la distinction des intérêts privés et des intérêts publics pourrait devenir un instrument de redéfinition du contrôle étatique des sentences arbitrales internationales. À la fois plus respectueux de la volonté des parties, plus protecteur des intérêts étatiques et offrant une solution au désordre actuel du contrôle des sentences arbitrales, ce nouveau paradigme concourrait à l’efficacité de l’arbitrage. / State control of international arbitral awards leads to a clear paradox, as it involves State court intervention to a procedure where the parties intended to exclude it. However, this paradox might only be a mirage. An approach based on the distinction between public interests and private interests opens up new perspectives. The review by the national judge invites him, on the one hand, to ensure the arbitrators’ compliance with the private interests of the parties, and, on the other hand, to control the compatibility of the award with public interests. Also, it seems conceivable that the interest in question could directly influence the nature of such control. At the same time, the competent judge is sometimes indirectly appointed by the parties, and sometimes determined by the place of enforcement of the award. It is therefore legitimate to give a separate, yet complementary, role to the annulment judge and to the enforcement judge. The annulment judge would consider the private interests whereas the enforcement judge would ensure the award's compliance with the public interests. Ultimately, the distinction between private interests and public interests could constitute the basis of redefining State control over international arbitral awards. More respectful of the will of the parties, more protective of State interests, this new paradigm would contribute to the effectiveness of arbitration.

No description available.

No description available.

Thesis (LLM)--Stellenbosch University, 2002 / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Arbitration is widely regarded as an important alternative to litigation, particularly for international commercial disputes. However, concern currently exists that arbitration is becoming too slow and too expensive, partly through using procedures too similar to those in the courts. Effective arbitration requires suitable legislation, the support of the parties and their lawyers and appropriate initiatives from the arbitral tribunal. The UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration of 1985 is the internationally accepted standard against which the quality of a nation's legislation for international commercial arbitration must be measured. A crucial aspect regarding suitable legislation is the role of the courts. This thesis is essentially concerned with steps which have been taken or need to be taken in Germany and South Africa to achieve effective arbitration. It commences with a brief overview of the sort of delaying tactics which are often encountered in international arbitration practice, including abuse of the court's powers of supervision and intervention. The reception in Germany and South Africa of the UNCITRAL Model Law is then discussed. In Germany it has been adopted for both domestic and international arbitration. The South African Law Commission has recommended its adoption in South Africa for international arbitration. The Law Commission has however recommended a new separate statute for domestic arbitration because of the perceived need for remedial measures to ensure improved arbitration procedures. The thesis then examines the effect of the court's powers on effective arbitration, particularly prior to the award. The current South African law is discussed as well as the changes proposed by the Law Commission in the context of domestic and international arbitration. The South African position is compared with that in Germany, both before and since the introduction of the UNCITRAL Model Law in 1998. After a general discussion of the powers of the court in the context of arbitration, two aspects are identified for special attention. The first is the power of the tribunal to rule on its own jurisdiction and the interaction between the powers of the court with those of the tribunal in this regard. The second concerns the granting of interim measures in the context of arbitration proceedings, with particular attention to security for costs. In certain circumstances, and depending on the applicable rules and legislation, it may be more appropriate for a party to seek such relief from the tribunal, whereas in slightly different circumstances it may be preferable to seek such relief from the court. Finally, steps are considered, which can usefully be taken by the arbitral tribunal itself to promote effective arbitration by using the flexibility of the process. The extent to which the tribunal is "master of its procedure" and thereby able to counter delaying tactics effectively is subject to the doctrine of party autonomy. Specific techniques for more effective arbitral procedures are suggested, namely a more interventionist approach, the use of preliminary meetings, imposing timetables, improving the hearing, the effective use of documentary evidence and discovery and finally the possibility of documents-only arbitration. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Arbitrasie word wyd beskou as 'n belangrike alternatief tot litigasie, veral by internasionale handelsgeskille. Kommer bestaan egter tans dat arbitrasie te stadig en te duur word, gedeeltelik deur die gebruik van prosedures wat te veel met dié van die howe ooreenstem. Doeltreffende arbitrasie vereis geskikte wetgewing, die ondersteuning van die partye en hulle regsverteenwoordigers en toepaslike inisiatiewe deur die arbitrasietribunaal. Die "UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration" van 1985 is die internasionaal aanvaarde standaard waarteen die gehalte van 'n land se wetgewing vir internasionale kommersiële arbitrasie gemeet moet word. 'n Kritieke oorweging by geskikte wetgewing is die rol van die howe. Hierdie tesis behandel die stappe wat in Duitsland en Suid-Afrika reeds geneem is of wat nog geneem moet word om doeltreffende arbitrasie te bewerkstellig. Dit begin met 'n kort oorsig oor die soort vertragingstaktiek wat dikwels in die internasionale arbitrasiepraktyk raakgeloop word, insluitende misbruik van die hof se bevoegdhede van toesighouding en inmenging. Die ontvangs van die "UNCITRAL Model Law" in Duitsland en Suid-Afrika word bespreek. Die wet is in Duitsland vir sowel binnelandse as internasionale arbitrasie ingevoer. Die Suid-Afrikaanse Regskommissie het sy invoering vir internasionale arbitrasie in Suid-Afrika aanbeveel. Die regskommissie het egter 'n nuwe afsonderlike wet vir binnelandse arbitrasie aanbeveel weens die gewaarde behoefte aan regstellende middele om verbeterde arbitrasieprosedures te verseker. Die tesis ondersoek daarna die uitwerking van die hof se bevoegdhede op doeltreffende arbitrasie, veral voor die arbitrasietoekenning. Die huidige Suid-Afrikaanse reg en die wysigings, wat deur die Regskommissie vir internasionale en binnelandse arbitrasie voorgestel word, word oorweeg. Die Suid-Afrikaanse posisie word met dié van Duitsland, voor en na die invoering van die "UNCITRAL Model Law" in 1998, vergelyk. Na 'n algemene bespreking van die hof se bevoegdhede in die samehang van arbitrasie word twee sake vir besondere aandag gekies. Die eerste is die bevoegdheid van die arbitrasietribunaal om oor sy eie jurisdiksie te beslis en die wisselwerking tussen die hof se bevoegdhede en dié van die arbitrasietribunaal in hierdie verband. Die tweede het betrekking op die toestaan van tussentydse regshulp in die samehang van arbitrasieverrigtinge, met besondere verwysing na sekuriteit vir koste. In besondere omstandighede, met inagneming van toepaslike reëls en wetgewing, behoort 'n party verkieslik sodanige regshulp by die arbitrasietribunaal aan te vra, terwyl in effens ander omstandighede behoort die partyeerder die hof te nader. Ten slotte word stappe oorweeg wat nuttig deur die arbitrasietribunaal self geneem kan word om doeltreffende arbitrasie aan te moedig deur die buigsaamheid van die arbitrasieproses te benut. Die mate waarin die tribunaal meester van sy prosedure is en daardeur vertragingstaktiek doeltreffend kan bekamp, is onderworpe aan die leerstuk van partyoutonomie. Bepaalde tegnieke word voorgestelom meer doeltreffende arbitrasieprosedures te bevorder, naamlik 'n meer intervensionistiese benadering, die gebruik van reëlingsvergaderings, die oplegging van 'n rooster vir die arbitrasie, verbetering van die verhoorproses, die doeltreffende gebruik van skriftelike getuienis en blootlegging en laastens die moontlikheid van arbitrasie slegs op dokumente.

Arbitration is the preferred method of dispute resolution in international trade. Naturally, a set of rules is necessary to govern the conflict&rsquo / s resolution. For cultural, political, economical or other reasons the parties&rsquo / national laws may not serve the individual interests and needs of that particular contract well. If one wants to avoid the application of both parties&rsquo / national laws, one can choose that the contract be governed by an a-national legal standard, e.g. general principles of International Trade Law or the general usages of a particular trade. These internationally accepted principles of law governing contractual relations are called lex mercatoria (law merchant).<br /> <br /> Lex mercatoria already existed in the Middle Ages and can even be dated back to antiquity. Later it disappeared through the nationalization of International Trade Law and was rediscovered in the 1950s, when international traders were again creating their own law and disputes were increasingly resolved outside of the national jurisdictions and applying a-national law. Lex mercatoria is being applied more and more by arbitrators and is therefore becoming increasingly important for dispute resolution in International Trade. Numerous different concepts and theories of lex mercatoria have been developed. Its being an autonomous legal system is questioned by some authors and the doctrine in favour of it called unfounded. The critics also argue that the authority to apply lex mercatoria may be a recipe for amateurism and the substitution of the arbitrator&rsquo / s private preferences for the parties&rsquo / intentions, for itis easy to proclaim common principles on the basis of limited knowledge. The lex mercatoria is said only to exist because scholars talk about it. However, these and other allegations can be refuted by critically analyzing the arguments that are supposed to underline those assumptions. Applying lex mercatoria to solve international trade disputes has many advantages. By choosing lex mercatoria the parties avoid rules which are unfit for international contracts, e.g. peculiar formalities, brief cut-off periods and special difficulties created by domestic laws. In addition to that, neither of the parties has the advantage of having the dispute governed by his own law. Since one of the central rules is the principle of good faith and fair dealing, lex mercatoria neither leads to arbitrary results nor does it favour the rich. Is it possible for the arbitrators to apply lex mercatoria if no law has been chosen by the parties? The failure of the parties to indicate a choice could well mean that they did not wish to have their contract governed by any of their national laws. In some awards arbitrators applied lex mercatoria as they considered the community of international merchants to be autonomous and to exist beyond national legislation. However, it cannot be deduced from the absence of such a choice that the parties have impliedly chosen lex mercatoria to be the law governing the conflict. Lex mercatoria is applicable only as a subsidiary law in cases where no national law has been chosen and seems apt.