L'analyse économique du droit conçoit les institutions d'arbitrage comme des prestataires de services qui offrent le service d'organisation de la procédure arbitrale. Comme tout marché, le marché de l'arbitrage institutionnel a besoin d'outils juridiques pour encadrer le nouement et le dénouement de ses opérations économiques. La technique contractuelle est le moyen le plus courant pour assurer la conclusion des transactions économiques sur les différents marchés de biens et services. Dans ce contexte, les prestations de services offertes par les centres d'arbitrage doivent sans doute prendre la forme d'une manifestation contractuelle qui encadre juridiquement leur activité sur le marché de l'arbitrage. C'est ainsi que le service d'organisation de l'arbitrage offert par le centre aux parties litigantes entraîne la conclusion d'un contrat d'organisation de l'arbitrage. Ce contrat dictera la relation contractuelle qui lie les parties litigantes à l'institution d'arbitrage. L'identification du contrat d'organisation de l'arbitrage nous a permis de présenter sa notion et de l'analyser via le prisme de l'ensemble contractuel de l'arbitrage. Il dérive d'une convention d'arbitrage principale et participe avec tous les contrats composant l'ensemble contractuel de l'arbitrage au bon fonctionnement de la procédure arbitrale. In fine, le contrat d'organisation de l'arbitrage devient le contrat par lequel le procès arbitral est intégré dans une structure investie, par la volonté commune des parties litigantes, de prérogatives contractuelles la rendant à même d'imposer des décisions institutionnelles garantissant ainsi un arbitrage efficace. / The economic analysis of the Law conceives the arbitration institutions as service providers that offer the service of the organization of the arbitration proceedings. Like any market, the market of institutional arbitration needs legal tools to regulate the outcome of its economic operations. Contractual technique is the most common way for the conclusion of economic transactions in the various markets of goods and services. In this context, the services offered by arbitration centers take the form of a contractual event that regulates the activity on the arbitration market. Thus, the service of the organization of the arbitration offered by the center to litigants leads to the conclusion of the contract of arbitration's organization. This contract will dictate the contractual relationship between the litigants and the arbitration institution. Identifying this contract allows us to present its concept and to analyze it through the prism of the "ensemble contractuel de l'arbitrage". Our contract derives from a main convention which is the arbitration convention. Ultimately, the contract of the organization of the arbitration is a contract by which the arbitration proceedings is integrated into a structure invested by the common will of the litigants with contractual prerogatives enabling it to impose institutional decisions ensuring an effective arbitration.

The Financial Arbitrator and alternative dispute resolution are the integral part of current decision-making practice. Their development is tendentious particularly in recent times. This diploma thesis aim is critically evaluate the institute of the Financial Arbitrator and compare it with arbitration and mediation. The thesis briefly describes the institutes themselves, their legal regulations and outlines their historical development. In my thesis I focused mainly on the similarities as well as differences of these institutes. Then I compared these decision-making practices with the court proceedings in the last fifth chapter, so the thesis gives a comprehensive overview of the possibilities of resolution making practice. The thesis focused on the situation in the Czech Republic and did not evaluate the foreign situation, although the author is aware of certain continuity with the development among the countries. The methodology of the thesis was adapted to the chosen topic. The basis was literary research. By comparing the problems, opinions, hypotheses and premise was possible to reach a final reasoned opinion. The principal methods were the method of analysis and synthesis. An important basis for this work was the annual reports of the Financial Arbitrator available from the finarbitr.cz...

178 REGULATION OF ALTERNATIVE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL DISPUTES RESOLUTION IN THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION ABSTRACT The object of this dissertation is an analysis of legal regulation of alternative international commercial disputes resolution in the Russian Federation, both from theoretical and practical perspectives. The work deals in detail with alternative international commercial disputes resolution regulated in the Russian legislation, i.e. with arbitration and mediation of international commercial disputes, analyzes their position within the Russian legal framework, interconnection with the judicial proceedings, legislation national dispute regulation, role of state organs within the proceedings including acknowledgement and enforcement of arbitration awards and mediation agreement.. Both of these ways are further analyzed in separate chapters that together form the core of this dissertation. The respective main chapters (devoted to arbitration and mediation of international commercial disputes) are further devided into subchapters, in which are analyzed the individual procedural institutes of arbitration and mediation of international commercial disputes. Special attention is devoted to the grounds and the process of setting aside of a foreign arbitral award as well as with the grounds and the process of...

Trois pays d’Amérique latine – la Bolivie, l’Équateur et le Venezuela – ont dénoncé la Convention pour le règlement des différends relatifs aux investissements entre États et ressortissants d’autres États. Cette « vague » de dénonciations témoigne d’un rejet du système d’arbitrage, créé par la Convention de Washington, considéré comme déséquilibré, antidémocratique, onéreux et discriminatoire. Aux yeux de l’Amérique latine, l’arbitrage CIRDI serait conçu pour bénéficier exclusivement aux investisseurs au détriment des États hôtes des investissements. Dans ce travail de recherche, l’approche de l’Amérique latine relative à la Convention de Washington sera présentée en deux étapes. D’abord, les évolutions liées au cadre économique et juridique latino-américain, des prémices de la Convention en 1964, jusqu’á son adoption définitive dans les années 90, seront analysées. Puis seront abordées les principales critiques émises actuellement contre le système d’arbitrage CIRDI. Quels sont les facteurs déterminants du changement dans les politiques en matière d’investissements étrangers en Amérique latine ? Les pays, qui ont dénoncé la Convention de Washington, ont-ils des raisons suffisamment valables de rejeter l’arbitrage transnational en matière d’investissements ? Le CIRDI a-t-il failli dans l’accomplissement de ses fonctions ? Ce travail de recherche vise à répondre à ces questions en analysant la Convention de Washington sous un angle latino-américain. / Three countries in Latin America - Bolivia, Ecuador and Venezuela - have denounced the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of other States. This "wave" of denunciations reflects a negative perception of the arbitration system created by the ICSID Convention, which is described as unbalanced, undemocratic, expensive and discriminatory. In Latin America’s view, ICSID arbitration was created to benefit only to investors at the expense of investments’ host states. This research focuses on the Latin America’s approach on the Washington Convention addressing it in two stages. First, the Latin American economic and legal framework in the early discussions on the draft of the Convention in 1964 and its subsequent adoption in the 1990s will be addressed. Secondly, the subjects that currently arouse the main criticisms to the ICSID arbitration system will be detailed. What are the reasons of change in foreign investment policies in Latin America? Do the countries that denounced the Washington Convention have acceptable reasons for rejecting investments’ transnational arbitration? Did ICSID failed in the performance of its duties? This research aims to answer these questions by analyzing the Washington Convention from the Latin American perspective.

Magister Legum - LLM / Alternative dispute resolution refers to forms of dispute resolution, other than traditional and formal court based litigation. A notable benefit of alternative dispute resolution is that different processes are available for resolving a particular dispute in the most effective and efficient manner possible. Alternative dispute resolution includes but is not limited to arbitration, mediation, negotiation, conciliation and facilitation. The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, lists human dignity, equality and the advancement of human rights and freedoms as the founding values of the Republic of South Africa. In terms of section 9(1) of the Constitution everyone is regarded as equal before the law and has the right to equal protection and benefit of the law in South Africa. Often it is however argued that traditional court based litigation hinders the full enjoyment of these rights by individuals. Consequently, alternative dispute resolution is attractive as an alternative to court based litigation as it is regarded as less expensive, more time effective and results in less conflict when it comes to resolving disputes in the most accessible, effective and efficient manner possible, in both developed and developing countries. The study will first focus on the pitfalls to traditional court based litigation in South Africa. The relevant legislation and processes which provide for alternative dispute resolution processes in South Africa, with specific focus on alternative dispute resolution in labour disputes, will be considered. Consideration will be given to the provision of alternative dispute resolution as contained in the Constitution, the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995, the Rules for the Conduct of Proceedings before the CCMA of 2003 and the Arbitration Act 42 of 1965. The study will thereafter proceed to consider the use of alternative dispute resolution in labour disputes in Brazil, Russia, India and China, who, together with South Africa, are collectively referred to as BRICS. These five nations are considered the world’s leading emerging economies, with similar economic capabilities and demographics.

O presente estudo tem como objetivo superar as diversas noções genéricas a respeito da imparcialidade do árbitro e assim atribuir-lhe um conceito próprio, estabelecido a partir do reconhecimento da vital importância do exercício da influência das partes na relação jurídica processual. O estudo parte da premissa de que todas as experiências pretéritas do árbitro (como as de qualquer indivíduo) constituem condição necessária para que este forme pré-conceitos e assim conheça e decida um conflito e que, por isso, tais experiências e conceitos pretéritos sempre existem e sempre influenciam o julgador. Também é premissa de análise o ambiente institucional em que a arbitragem se desenvolve e no qual os profissionais buscam auferir capital simbólico que lhes possibilite êxito nas nomeações para a função de árbitro. Essas premissas impedem que se aprove a noção genérica da imparcialidade como equidistância, ausência de interesse próprio na solução do litígio ou ausência de outras influências no convencimento do árbitro além dos argumentos lançados pelas partes no litígio, e impõem o reconhecimento de um conteúdo apoiado na inexistência de barreira à influência que os argumentos das partes exercerão na decisão do árbitro (a despeito, portanto, de quaisquer outras influências às quais o julgador como todo indivíduo está sujeito). A identificação de um conteúdo para a imparcialidade é, todavia, insuficiente para a solução de problemas práticos, razão pela qual o presente estudo sugere sua operacionalização por norma concreta extraída de regras vinculantes que imponham um comportamento (art. 14, caput, da Lei de Arbitragem brasileira) ou um estado de coisas (art. 13, § 6º da Lei de Arbitragem brasileira) que atenda a certas premissas de estrutura e de conteúdo. As premissas de estrutura têm como finalidade garantir a coerência e coesão sistemáticas da norma concreta, ao passo que as premissas de conteúdo (extraídas de casos reais) buscam a coerência interna da norma, ou seja, a coerência entre o juízo hipotético-normativo e o juízo sobre o evento fático subjacente. Essas premissas são examinadas à luz do ambiente institucional no qual a arbitragem se desenvolve, caracterizado principalmente pela interdependência e contínuo contato entre profissionais, a constante troca de papéis a que tais profissionais se sujeitam (ora como árbitros, ora como advogados) e a assimetria de informação. Propostos um conteúdo e um método de operacionalizá-lo para a solução de casos concretos, o presente estudo procura desatrelar a imparcialidade e seus efeitos da noção geral de independência do árbitro, sem apelar para a imprecisa dicotomia subjetividade-objetividade. Reconhece, ainda, que do árbitro são demandadas posturas diferentes daquelas preconizadas aos juízes, razão pela qual a aplicação de regras equiparativas (tal como o art. 14, caput, da Lei de Arbitragem brasileira), além de não esgotar todas as hipóteses de ataque à imparcialidade, deve ser precedida de diversas adaptações. Reconhece, também, o sentido e o alcance do binômio ciência-aceitação na prática arbitral. Por fim, o estudo trata da diversa natureza entre o dever de revelação e a imparcialidade impostos ao árbitro, de cujas violações derivam consequências também distintas. / The present study aims to overcome several general notions concerning the impartiality of the arbitrator and thus gives it a proper concept, drawn from the recognition of the vital importance of parties to exercise influence on the procedural legal relationship. The study assumes that all past experiences of the adjudicator (as any individual) constitute a necessary condition for him to create pre-conceptions and so understand and decide a conflict - and that therefore these experiences and past concepts always influence the adjudicator. The institutional environment in which the arbitration is developed and in which practitioners seek to derive symbolic capital that enables them to succeed in the nominations for the role of arbitrator is also a premise of analysis. This premise prevents from approving the generic notion of impartiality as \"equidistance\", \"the absence of self-interest in the outcome of the case\" or \"the absence of other influences in the convincing process of the adjudicator beyond the arguments submitted by the parties in dispute\", and requires the recognition of content based on the \"absence of barriers to the influence that the arguments of the parties shall exercise on the arbitrator\'s decision\" (regardless of any other influences to which the judge as any individual is exposed). Identifying content for impartiality is, however, insufficient for the solution of actual problems, and due to that, the study suggests its operation by a norm extracted from binding rules imposing conduct (art. 14, caput of Brazilian Arbitration Law) or a state of affairs (art. 13, § 6 of the Brazilian Arbitration Law) that meets certain premise of structure and content. The premise of structure is designed to provide systematic consistency and cohesion of the norm, and the premise of content (drawn from actual cases) seeks internal consistency of the standard, i.e., the consistency between the description of the event anticipated in the norm and the description of the underlying factual event. This premise is examined in the light of the institutional environment in which the arbitration is developed, mainly characterized by interdependence and continuous contact between professionals, the constant exchange of roles among such professionals (either as arbitrators or as lawyers) and information asymmetry. Proposed both a content and a method to operationalize it for the solution of actual cases, this study seeks to release fairness and its effects from the general notion of independence of the arbitrator, without resorting to imprecise objectivity-subjectivity dichotomy. It also recognizes that the institutional environment requires postures from the arbitrators that differ substantially from those required from judges; due to this reason, the application of rules that apparently prescribe the same standards or behaviors for both (such as art. 14, caput, the Brazilian Arbitration Law) does not fill all the hypothesis capable of menacing the impartiality and must be preceded by various adaptations. It also recognizes the meaning and scope of the binomial information-acceptance in arbitral practice. Finally, the study addresses the diverse nature of the duty of disclosure and impartiality imposed on the arbitrator, whose respective violations also imply different consequences.

Esta dissertação analisa as questões concernentes às tutelas de urgência antes e durante o processo arbitral (incluindo-se a forma como podem ser pleiteadas, apreciadas e efetivadas), bem como a interação entre os árbitros, o Poder Judiciário e também entre a Câmara de Arbitragem responsável pela condução do processo arbitral (no caso de arbitragem institucional). O trabalho traz uma breve análise sobre a história da arbitragem e acerca de sua natureza jurídica, com um enfoque específico às tutelas de urgência, analisando, igualmente, os regulamentos dos principais centros de arbitragens pátrios e alienígenas, bem como a legislação nacional e estrangeira sobre o tema das tutelas de urgência em arbitragem. Os principais pontos analisados referem-se: (i) às tutelas de urgência prévias à instauração da arbitragem (quando as partes já se comprometeram, por meio de cláusula compromissória ou de compromisso arbitral, a solucionar eventual lide por meio da arbitragem); (ii) às tutelas de urgência no curso de um processo arbitral; (iii) à efetivação das tutelas de urgência, a qual exige a utilização de força e, por conseguinte, depende do auxílio e de interação com o Poder Judiciário; (iv) à efetivação das tutelas de urgência proferidas em arbitragens estrangeiras; e (v) às anti-suit injunctions. / This dissertation analyses the questions regarding provisional and interim measures previously or during an arbitration proceeding (including the means they can be pleaded, analyzed and enforced), as well as the interaction between the arbitrators, the Judiciary Power and also with the Court of Arbitration responsible for the conduction of the arbitration proceeding (in the case of institutional arbitration). The study brings a brief analysis of the history of arbitration and about its legal nature, with a specific focus on provisional and interim measures, also analyzing the regulations of the main Courts of Arbitration from Brazil and from abroad, as well as the Brazilian and foreign legislation about provisional and interim measures in arbitration. The main topics analyzed are referred to: (i) provisional and interim measures previously to the beginning of the arbitration (when the parties have already committed themselves, through arbitration clause or arbitration agreement, to resolve any conflict through arbitration); (ii) provisional and interim measures during an arbitration proceeding; (iii) the enforcement of provisional and interim measures, which requires the use of force (coercive power) and, therefore, depends on the assistance and the support of the Judiciary Power; (iv) the enforcement of provisional and interim measures rendered on foreign arbitrations; and (v) the anti-suit injunctions.

O presente estudo tem como objetivo superar as diversas noções genéricas a respeito da imparcialidade do árbitro e assim atribuir-lhe um conceito próprio, estabelecido a partir do reconhecimento da vital importância do exercício da influência das partes na relação jurídica processual. O estudo parte da premissa de que todas as experiências pretéritas do árbitro (como as de qualquer indivíduo) constituem condição necessária para que este forme pré-conceitos e assim conheça e decida um conflito e que, por isso, tais experiências e conceitos pretéritos sempre existem e sempre influenciam o julgador. Também é premissa de análise o ambiente institucional em que a arbitragem se desenvolve e no qual os profissionais buscam auferir capital simbólico que lhes possibilite êxito nas nomeações para a função de árbitro. Essas premissas impedem que se aprove a noção genérica da imparcialidade como equidistância, ausência de interesse próprio na solução do litígio ou ausência de outras influências no convencimento do árbitro além dos argumentos lançados pelas partes no litígio, e impõem o reconhecimento de um conteúdo apoiado na inexistência de barreira à influência que os argumentos das partes exercerão na decisão do árbitro (a despeito, portanto, de quaisquer outras influências às quais o julgador como todo indivíduo está sujeito). A identificação de um conteúdo para a imparcialidade é, todavia, insuficiente para a solução de problemas práticos, razão pela qual o presente estudo sugere sua operacionalização por norma concreta extraída de regras vinculantes que imponham um comportamento (art. 14, caput, da Lei de Arbitragem brasileira) ou um estado de coisas (art. 13, § 6º da Lei de Arbitragem brasileira) que atenda a certas premissas de estrutura e de conteúdo. As premissas de estrutura têm como finalidade garantir a coerência e coesão sistemáticas da norma concreta, ao passo que as premissas de conteúdo (extraídas de casos reais) buscam a coerência interna da norma, ou seja, a coerência entre o juízo hipotético-normativo e o juízo sobre o evento fático subjacente. Essas premissas são examinadas à luz do ambiente institucional no qual a arbitragem se desenvolve, caracterizado principalmente pela interdependência e contínuo contato entre profissionais, a constante troca de papéis a que tais profissionais se sujeitam (ora como árbitros, ora como advogados) e a assimetria de informação. Propostos um conteúdo e um método de operacionalizá-lo para a solução de casos concretos, o presente estudo procura desatrelar a imparcialidade e seus efeitos da noção geral de independência do árbitro, sem apelar para a imprecisa dicotomia subjetividade-objetividade. Reconhece, ainda, que do árbitro são demandadas posturas diferentes daquelas preconizadas aos juízes, razão pela qual a aplicação de regras equiparativas (tal como o art. 14, caput, da Lei de Arbitragem brasileira), além de não esgotar todas as hipóteses de ataque à imparcialidade, deve ser precedida de diversas adaptações. Reconhece, também, o sentido e o alcance do binômio ciência-aceitação na prática arbitral. Por fim, o estudo trata da diversa natureza entre o dever de revelação e a imparcialidade impostos ao árbitro, de cujas violações derivam consequências também distintas. / The present study aims to overcome several general notions concerning the impartiality of the arbitrator and thus gives it a proper concept, drawn from the recognition of the vital importance of parties to exercise influence on the procedural legal relationship. The study assumes that all past experiences of the adjudicator (as any individual) constitute a necessary condition for him to create pre-conceptions and so understand and decide a conflict - and that therefore these experiences and past concepts always influence the adjudicator. The institutional environment in which the arbitration is developed and in which practitioners seek to derive symbolic capital that enables them to succeed in the nominations for the role of arbitrator is also a premise of analysis. This premise prevents from approving the generic notion of impartiality as \"equidistance\", \"the absence of self-interest in the outcome of the case\" or \"the absence of other influences in the convincing process of the adjudicator beyond the arguments submitted by the parties in dispute\", and requires the recognition of content based on the \"absence of barriers to the influence that the arguments of the parties shall exercise on the arbitrator\'s decision\" (regardless of any other influences to which the judge as any individual is exposed). Identifying content for impartiality is, however, insufficient for the solution of actual problems, and due to that, the study suggests its operation by a norm extracted from binding rules imposing conduct (art. 14, caput of Brazilian Arbitration Law) or a state of affairs (art. 13, § 6 of the Brazilian Arbitration Law) that meets certain premise of structure and content. The premise of structure is designed to provide systematic consistency and cohesion of the norm, and the premise of content (drawn from actual cases) seeks internal consistency of the standard, i.e., the consistency between the description of the event anticipated in the norm and the description of the underlying factual event. This premise is examined in the light of the institutional environment in which the arbitration is developed, mainly characterized by interdependence and continuous contact between professionals, the constant exchange of roles among such professionals (either as arbitrators or as lawyers) and information asymmetry. Proposed both a content and a method to operationalize it for the solution of actual cases, this study seeks to release fairness and its effects from the general notion of independence of the arbitrator, without resorting to imprecise objectivity-subjectivity dichotomy. It also recognizes that the institutional environment requires postures from the arbitrators that differ substantially from those required from judges; due to this reason, the application of rules that apparently prescribe the same standards or behaviors for both (such as art. 14, caput, the Brazilian Arbitration Law) does not fill all the hypothesis capable of menacing the impartiality and must be preceded by various adaptations. It also recognizes the meaning and scope of the binomial information-acceptance in arbitral practice. Finally, the study addresses the diverse nature of the duty of disclosure and impartiality imposed on the arbitrator, whose respective violations also imply different consequences.

As the investment treaty arbitration regime matures, consensus is emerging as to the need for public interest considerations to be taken into account in resolving disputes under international investment agreements (IIAs). However, the question of how such considerations should be reflected remains contentious. This thesis proposes that the remedies stage of the process can, and should, play a role in taking account of public interest considerations and so in easing the tension between host state regulatory sovereignty and investment protection that lies at the heart of the investment treaty regime. Thus, this thesis argues that, while, on the one hand, there is a need to introduce an element of reciprocity into the investment treaty arbitration process in order to ensure continuing state co-operation and to reflect the broader underlying purposes of IIAs, on the other, the primary object of the system remains the protection of foreign investors. These competing imperatives can lead to difficulties in taking account of public interest considerations at the merits stage of the arbitration process. Therefore, in order to reconcile these competing imperatives and to achieve an optimal balance between host state regulatory sovereignty and investment protection, this thesis proposes that public interest considerations should be recognised at the remedies stage where such considerations cannot be taken into account either sufficiently or at all at the merits stage and identifies a number of situations in which this approach would be appropriate. Potential doctrinal bases for implementation of this approach are also examined and the conclusion reached that, given the significant degree of discretion afforded to tribunals in applying the full reparation principle and the role that equity can permissibly play in quantifying damages, this approach can, save in the case of lawful expropriations, be implemented within the parameters of existing legal principles.

This thesis explores the rules of treaty interpretation as they are applied by foreign investment arbitral tribunals ("FIATs"). Its primary aims are: a) to determine whether FIAT treaty interpretation practice is generally consistent with other international courts and tribunals; b) to assess whether the treaty interpretation rules contained in the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties ("Vienna Convention") are suitable for application in investor-State treaty disputes; and c) to evaluate the contribution of FIAT treaty interpretation jurisprudence to international law. The body of the thesis provides a background to treaty interpretation rules in international law and then examines in detail the application of the rules of interpretation contained in the Vienna Convention by both international courts and tribunals and FIATs. It also explores modes of interpretation that have been deployed by these two groups which are not explicitly referenced in the Vienna Convention. Investigation is also made of some unique or notable aspects of FIAT jurisprudence that relates to treaty interpretation. The research was carried out primarily through the analysis of international court and tribunal decisions and FIAT awards. The principal findings of the thesis are that: a) a general congruence exists between the interpretative practice of FIATs and that of other international courts and tribunals; b) the application of the Vienna Convention rules on treaty interpretation are suitable for investment treaty arbitration, with some exceptions, e. g., in situations where investors have vastly disproportionate access to the preparatory work of treaties as compared with respondent States; and c) FIATs have made a significant contribution to the international law of treaty interpretation.