Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:23:05Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Karen Cristina Moron Betti Mendes.pdf: 1134236 bytes, checksum: 86dd87a0f2aa20027de923c4728f860a (MD5) Previous issue date: 2014-08-26 / The object of study of this work is to present the institutional arbitration as a dynamic and harmonic alternative for the settlement of disputes in dealings relating to contracts of franchises. Justifying this work, with ballast in that, given the dynamics of the relationship in the business world, the internationalization of trade, the agility and speed with which such relations are given, especially in the segment of franchising, there are at least three identifiable assumptions plan, that need to be preserved in the case of solving work in franchising: the expertise of the judge in the matter; the rapid solution of the conflict and the maintenance of good business relationship after the conflict solved, what you get in line of identity, to apply the arbitration as an effective method in this intention. By the way, will be analyzed in this work both institutes, first separately, and after, in their points of confluence, as well as bringing to the fore the controversial aspects that may arise in this relationship of mutualism, which in the course of the study are dissolved, through security keys presented to get the effectiveness and validity of the application of the method do not state, duly harmonized to the franchise, and, finally, suggesting legislative amendment to the law of franchises to guarantee the effective use and valid arbitration in the segment of franchises. / O objetivo do presente estudo é apresentar a arbitragem institucional como uma alternativa dinâmica e harmônica para a solução de controvérsias nas relações negociais relativas aos contratos de franquias. Justifica-se este trabalho com lastro em que, dada a dinâmica das relações no mundo dos negócios, a internacionalização do comércio, a agilidade e a velocidade com que se dão tais relações, notadamente no segmento de franquias, há pelo menos três premissas identificáveis de plano que precisam ser preservadas em se tratando de solucionar lides na franchising: a especialização do julgador na matéria, a rapidez na solução do conflito e a manutenção da boa relação comercial depois de solucionado o conflito, o que se obtém em linha de identidade, ao se aplicar a arbitragem como método eficaz nesse intento. Para tanto, serão aqui analisados ambos os institutos, tanto da arbitragem quanto da franquia, primeiro em separado e, após, em seus pontos de confluência, bem como trazendo à tona os aspectos polêmicos que poderão surgir nessa relação de mutualismo, os quais são dissolvidos no decorrer do estudo, por meio de chaves de segurança apresentadas para que se obtenham a eficácia e a validade da aplicação do método não estatal, devidamente harmonizado à franquia, e, por fim, sugerindo alteração legislativa à Lei de Franquia para garantia da utilização eficaz e válida da arbitragem no segmento de franquiasa

L'arbitrage est un mode de résolution des litiges par l'intermédiaire d'un tribunal arbitral composé d'un ou plusieurs arbitres. Il permet, comme devant les tribunaux étatiques, de régler un litige en vertu d'une sentence rendue à l'issue d'une procédure arbitrale dans laquelle chacune des parties doit prouver ce qu'elle allègue afin d'établir la conviction des arbitres. C'est par le recours aux divers modes de preuve inspirés des différents systèmes juridiques notamment du système de Common Law et du système de droit civil que les plaideurs pourront atteindre cette finalité.En revanche, parce que l'arbitrage international ne possède ni for ni législation spéciaux, l'administration des preuves dans une instance arbitrale internationale revêt un caractère sui generis de fait que l'arbitrage international a reconnu un système de preuve qui a utilisé les avantages des divers systèmes juridiques. Ainsi, on retrouve que la preuve écrite, qu'elle soit sur support papier ou sur support électronique, est administrée selon le model civiliste qui donne la primauté à une preuve préconstituée à l'avance. Mais, en ce qui concerne la preuve par témoin, l'influence des droits de Common Law paraît claire surtout que dans la plupart des cas, le pouvoir de nommer et d'interroger les témoins revient aux plaideurs qui utilisent la méthode d'Examination lors de l'interrogation des témoins. C'est aussi le cas de l'expertise qui est souvent considérée comme une preuve orale dans laquelle il revient aux parties le pouvoir de désigner les experts et de les interroger suivant l'interrogatoire direct et le contre interrogatoire tout comme des témoins. Ainsi, les preuves dans l'arbitrage international peuvent être reparties en preuves écrites et preuves orales dont les premières sont constituées de l'écrit sur support papier ou sur support électronique et les secondes sont formées par la preuve par témoin et la preuve par expertise. / The arbitration is a method of resolving disputes through an arbitration tribunal composed of one or several arbitrators. He allows resolving a dispute under a sentence delivered after an arbitration procedure in which all parties have to prove what they adduce to convince the tribunal. It is by using various modes of proof inspired specially from the system of Common Law and the system of Civil Law that parties can achieve this purpose.On the other hand, because the international arbitration has neither a territory nor legislation, it was created a system which combines between best practices of Common Law and Civil Law. So, the written evidence is produced according to the practice of Civil Law which gives primacy to a proof written in advance. But for the oral testimony, it is the common Law which dominates the administration of this proof by giving parties the right to nominate and interrogate witnesses. This is also what happens when arbitrators decide to use an expertise in which the parties have the power to nominate experts and interrogate them as witnesses. So, the evidence in international arbitration can be divided into written evidence made up by the writing on paper medium and electronic medium and oral evidence formed by proof by witness and proof by expertise.

Judicial enforcement of arbitral awards is necessary where there is no voluntary compliance by the relevant parties. Courts world-wide may refuse to enforce arbitral awards if such enforcement would be contrary to the public policy of their countries. This is known as ‘the public policy exception to the enforcement of arbitral awards’. It is enshrined in the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1958 (New York Convention) and the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration 1985 (Model Law), which are two of the most prominent international instruments in promoting and regulating international commercial arbitration.The public policy exception is one of the most controversial exceptions to the enforcement of arbitral awards, causing judicial inconsistency and therefore unpredictability in its application. It is often likened to an ‘unruly horse’, which may lead us from sound law. The International Law Association’s Resolution on Public Policy as a Bar to Enforcement of International Arbitral Awards 2002 (ILA Resolution) endorses a narrow approach to the public policy exception – namely, refusal of enforcement under the public policy exception in exceptional circumstances only. The ILA Resolution seeks to facilitate the finality of arbitral awards in accordance with the New York Convention’s primary goal of facilitating the enforcement of arbitral awards. The courts of many countries refer to this as the New York Convention’s ‘pro-enforcement policy’, which demands a narrow approach to the public policy exception.This thesis explores the main controversies and complexities in the judicial application of the public policy exception from an Australian perspective. It is a critical analysis of the prevalent narrow approach to the public policy exception. It examines the extent of the ILA Resolution’s suitability and applicability in Australia, considering past problems experienced by the courts of other countries, the distinctive features of the Australian legal system, and future challenges confronting the Australian judiciary. It examines when and how the Australian judiciary may need to swim against the tide by departing from the narrow approach to the public policy exception. For instance, such departure may be appropriate for ensuring that their application of the public policy exception neither causes nor condones injustice, and thereby preserves the integrity and faith in the system of arbitration. The author’s perspective throughout this thesis is that of an academic lawyer, as she has not had the benefit of practical experience in this area of the law.The recommendations throughout this thesis are tailor-made for the Australian judiciary. They are Australian in perspective yet international in character. They canvass certain issues not addressed in the ILA Resolution, encouraging the Australian judiciary to participate in the ongoing debate and the ultimate resolution of those issues. In doing so, this thesis contributes to refining the judicial application of public policy in determining the enforceability of arbitral awards. The public policy exception to the enforcement of arbitral awards, or its application, need not be an unruly horse in Australia.“This version contains corrections of typographical errors identified in the original version of the thesis submitted for completion of the SJD program”.

I tysk rätt har Bundesgerichtshof sedan länge slagit fast att både en ny och kvarstående part är skiljebundna efter singularsuccession. Skiljebundenhet för den nya parten vid Abtretung (borgenärsbyte) baseras på § 404 Bürgeliches Gesetzbuch (BGB) som anger att en ny part inte kan få bättre rätt än den överlåtande parten. Den kvarstående partens bundenhet stöds på en analogi av § 401 BGB som innebär att sidorättigheter som är kopplade till ett avtal går över på en ny part vid singularsuccession. Undantag till skiljebundenheten föreligger om en avvikande partsvilja kan påvisas. Högsta domstolen uttalade i NJA 1997 s. 866 att skiljebundenhet ska föreligga för både ny och kvarstående part efter singularsuccession. Den nya partens bundenhet grundas på att den kvarstående parten inte ska få sin rätt försämrad genom en överlåtelse som denne inte har kunnat motsätta sig samt 27 § lagen (1936:81) om skuldebrev. Skiljebundenheten för den kvarstående parten motiverades med att denne annars skulle kunna spekulera i valet av tvisteform. En haltande bundenhet ansågs oskäligt av domstolen som slog fast att bundenhet skulle föreligga om inga ”särskilda omständigheter” kunde påvisas. ”Särskilda omständigheter” omfattar enligt doktrin antingen den nya partens oförmåga att stå kostnaderna i ett skiljeförfarande eller att skiljeavtalet har slutits på grund av en stark personlig anknytning mellan de ursprungliga parterna. Betalningsoförmåga bör inte ses som en ”särskild omständighet” eftersom situationen likväl kan uppkomma utan att succession har skett. Om betalningsoförmåga ska vara ett undantag till skiljebundenhet så bör det vara ett generellt undantag som inte förutsätter succession. Undantaget för ett nära förhållande mellan de ursprungliga parterna bör ändras till att istället motsvara det tyska undantaget om avvikande partsvilja. På så vis kan en stark personlig anknytning fortfarande utgöra ett undantag till skiljebundenhet men undantaget blir mer flexibelt. I propositionen till lag (1999:116) om skiljeförfarande framförde regeringen att skiljebundenhet vid singularsuccession borde regleras av rättstillämpningen eftersom det inte skulle vara möjligt att införa en lagregel som täckte alla tänkbara situationer vilket tyder på att ett flexibelt undantag behövs. Undantag till skiljebundenhet vid singularsuccession bör också utvidgas till att omfatta en ny part för att undvika en haltande möjlighet till undantag. Om en haltande bundenhet anses oskälig torde en haltande möjlighet till undantag också vara det. Undantaget till skiljebundenhet i svensk rätt är i behov av både förändring och förtydligande.Vad

Thesis (M.S.)--Naval Postgraduate School, 2002. / Thesis advisor(s): Ron B. Tudor, James M. Barnard. Includes bibliographical references (p. 47-49). Also available online.

In Europe of the Middle Ages, there existed an autonomous regime of truly private international business law based upon the customs and usages of merchants, the Law Merchant, administered in lay tribunals. The courts and legislators usurped the jurisdiction of the lay tribunals, and subverted the Law Merchant to municipal law. Arbitration was similarly subverted to municipal courts and strict legal controls. The courts continued to guard their jurisdiction jealously into the 20th century, when nations came to realize the inadequacy of national legal systems for international business problems, and the desire of business to escape parochial legal concerns and municipal courts. Canada adopted the New York Convention and UNCITRAL Model Law in 1986, which maximize party and arbitral autonomy and restrict court interference with arbitration. These new laws would permit the resurrection of an autonomous regime of international commercial dispute settlement largely divorced from national law and court controls, if the courts cooperate. This thesis is the first comprehensive, up-to-date study (of which I am aware) of Canadian case law on arbitration in the context of the history of autonomous commercial dispute resolution from the its zenith in the Middle Ages through its nadir, to its present attempted resurrection. This thesis shows that the courts of Canada continue to guard their jurisdiction jealously, finding the means in old notions and precedents to justify their refusal to cede jurisdiction to arbitrators. The courts have ignored the policies underlying the new laws, have failed to apply international precedents and standards, and have continued to apply notions and precedents from an era hostile to arbitration.

Šiame magistro baigiamajame darbe analizuojamos valstybės kaip ginčo šalies tarptautiniame komerciniame arbitraže lemiamos teorinės ir praktinės problemos tiriant tarptautinio komercinio arbitražo, arbitražo šalių bei valstybės kaip ginčo šalies tarptautiniame komerciniame arbitraže sampratas. Taip pat analizuojamas galimas įpareigojimų sukūrimas, arbitražinio susitarimo nesudariusioms šalims, valstybės imuniteto tarptautiniame komerciniame arbitraže klausimai bei kiti arbitražo proceso, kuomet viena ginčo šalių - valstybė - ypatumai. Be to, paskutinėje šio magistro baigiamojo darbo dalyje analizuojama Lietuvos Respublikos, kaip ginčo šalies tarptautiniame komerciniame arbitraže, patirtis. / Firstly, in this master thesis the concepts of international commercial arbitration, parties of the arbitration and a state as a party to a dispute in international commercial arbitration are analysed. The analysis of the concept of international commercial arbitration shows that in author’s opinion the concept of international commercial arbitration determined in the Law of Commercial Arbitration of the Republic of Lithuania should be revised. Also the conclusion should be done that the problem of the content of the ‘state’ concept is existing in both – practical and theoretical levels. As the practice regarding this question is not well-established, after the analysis of the existing theories the application of the mixed theory of the concept of the ‘state’ is suggested. Moreover in this master thesis the possibility to bind the non-signatories to arbitration agreement and questions of the immunity of a state in international commercial arbitration are analysed. Those institutes are raising a number of practical problems as on the one hand the threat to bind the non-signatory of the arbitration agreement arises and on another hand the possibility that the award of the arbitral tribunal will not be recognized and/or enforced exists. It is suggested to solve both problems by including special terms into the agreement by which the arbitration agreement is concluded with a state – i. e. it is suggested for the parties clearly to indicate in the agreement the persons that shall... [to full text]

The arbitration legislation of Kazakhstan has no direct answer to the problem of possible participation of the third parties therein. The analysis of the Kazakhstani legislation and practice, as well as the comparison of the Kazakhstani approach with international approaches regarding the problem of the third parties have revealed the necessity in the legislative reforms to be taken in Kazakhstan. These reforms are required for stabilization and equilibration of the position of third parties with all rest parties of the arbitration proceedings. Thus, the main aim of this thesis is to elaborate a series of suggestions on the potential development of the arbitration procedural legislative system and to address some of the gaps in the existing arbitration legislation.

The arbitration legislation of Kazakhstan has no direct answer to the problem of possible participation of the third parties therein. The analysis of the Kazakhstani legislation and practice, as well as the comparison of the Kazakhstani approach with international approaches regarding the problem of the third parties have revealed the necessity in the legislative reforms to be taken in Kazakhstan. These reforms are required for stabilization and equilibration of the position of third parties with all rest parties of the arbitration proceedings. Thus, the main aim of this thesis is to elaborate a series of suggestions on the potential development of the arbitration procedural legislative system and to address some of the gaps in the existing arbitration legislation.

The dissertation focuses on a legal analysis of the most problematic legal issues predetermined by the fact that the State is a party to the arbitration agreement. The dissertation thesis consists of two sections. Firstly, the issue whether the State and legal persons of public law have a right to enter into an arbitration agreement is analysed. The dissertation provides information about trends of legal regulation in various countries and analyses how restrictions of the right to enter into arbitration agreement are applied and qualified in court and arbitration practice as well as by legal scholars. Also, the dissertation thesis takes into consideration relatively new legal representations of international commercial arbitration described by Professor E. Gaillard and their impact on the application of the abovementioned restrictions. In addition, the rationale of the restrictions is questioned in the dissertation. Secondly, the analysis was carried out of State immunity issue in the context of international commercial arbitration: the argumentation of the conclusion that the State does not enjoy immunity in arbitration proceedings is analysed as well as its legal impact on application of State immunity rules in court proceedings related to arbitration and in execution process (when it is sought to apply the measures of constraint against the property of the State in order to secure the execution of a future arbitral award or in order to enforce an arbitration award). / Disertacijoje nagrinėjami du pagrindiniai probleminiai klausimai, kurie dažniausiai pasireiškia arbitraže, kurio viena šalių yra valstybė ar viešosios teisės juridinis asmuo. Disertaciją sudaro du skyriai, iš kurių pirmame yra analizuojamas valstybės bei viešosios teisės juridinių asmenų teisės sudaryti arbitražinį susitarimą problematika, analizuojamos šio klausimo reglamentavimo įvairių pasaulio valstybių įstatymuose tendencijos bei valstybės ir viešosios teisės juridinių asmenų teisės sudaryti arbitražinius susitarimus apribojimų vertinimas teismų bei arbitražo praktikoje bei doktrinoje. Kartu pirmojoje disertacijos dalyje yra pateikiama galima naujai prancūzų profesoriaus E. Gaillard išskirtų požiūrių į tarptautinį komercinį arbitražą įtaka nagrinėjam klausimui, įvertinamas valstybės bei viešosios teisės juridinių asmenų teisės sudaryti arbitražinius susitarimus pagrįstumas. Antroji disertacijos dalis yra skirta valstybės imuniteto klausimams arbitražo kontekste: analizuojama argumentacija, kuri pagrindžia išvadą, jog valstybė neturi imuniteto arbitraže ir atitinkamai šios išvados įtaka valstybės imuniteto taikymui teismo procesuose, susijusiuose su arbitražu, o taip pat ir valstybės turto imuniteto taikymui, kai yra siekiama suvaržyti valstybės turtą, užtikrinant būsimo arbitražo sprendimo vykdymą ar vykdant arbitražo sprendimą.