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.

This thesis examines the influence of compulsory state arbitration and wages board systems on workplace industrial relations. Using an historical and comparative case study approach, the thesis researches workplace industrial relations at three firms operating in the metal industry between 1900 and 1929. A political economy perspective is employed to examine the interaction of institutional stnictures and economic and political processes in the regulation of the wage-effort bargain at the workplace. Key concepts are drawn from both mainstream industrial relations theory, in particular the Oxford School approach, and labour process theory. Drawing on the work of flanders, a distinction is made between the economic and political aspects of the wage-effort bargain through the differentiation of market relations and managerial relations. This thesis argues that arbitral and wages board systems interacted with a range of factors to shape and influence workplace industrial relations. In keeping with the political economy perspective, the thesis examines the economic, industry, technological, political, and institutional environment within which the three cases operated, identifying changes and trends in these factors during the period under review and their implications for workplace industrial relations. The three cases allowed a closer examination of the influence of these general trends on the development of workplace industrial relations. The cases demonstrate the diversity of the metals sector, each representing a different industry in that sector. Further, the cases differed in their geographic and jurisdictional location, allowing comparisons between Victoria and New South Wales to be made. An examination of the role of arbitral tribunals and wages boards argues that the tribunals used their ability to regulate and stabilise market relations to offset their intervention in managerial relations. In this respect the tribunals sought to engineer changes in managerial relations favourable to industry development and yet simultaneously obtain support from the unions through improvements in market relations. As a consequence of these conflicting objectives the tribunals often behaved in a contradictory manner. In addition, unintended consequences often flowed from tribunal regulation and were important in shaping events at the workplace. Thus while industrial tribunals sought to improve market relations, they inadvertently assisted workers to gain more influence over managerial relations. In each case the workplace was the site of much regulatory activity, whether initiated by management, unions or workers. However, the three cases each present a different pattern of workplace industrial relations in terms: of scope of regulation at the workplace; the role of unions; the nature of managerial strategy; the role of unions; and the implementation and enforcement of tribunals decisions. Moreover, the effect of arbitration and wages board systems at each workplace varied, with the influence of a particular matrix of industry, economic, technological and institutional conditions shaped at the workplace.

L’autorité de la chose jugée est consubstantielle à l’idée même de justice. Si l’arbitrage est une justice privée et contractuelle mais une «justice quand même», elle doit logiquement composer avec l’autorité de la chose jugée. Il faut d’abord que les décisions issues de cette justice puissent bénéficier d’une telle autorité ; il faut ensuite que les juridictions arbitrales respectent l’autorité des décisions qui ont été rendues antérieurement. C’est ce second point qui est le cœur de notre étude.Du point de vue de l’arbitre du commerce international, la question de l’autorité des décisions, qu’elles soient arbitrales ou étatiques, présente des difficultés originales qui tiennent, pour l’essentiel, à la position autonome de l’arbitre. Investi d’une mission juridictionnelle ponctuelle par la volonté des parties, l’arbitre n’est a priori pas tenu par les considérations relatives à la cohérence d’un ordre juridique précis, à la paix sociale, à la bonne administration de la justice… Autrement dit, le seul caractère juridictionnel de sa mission ne lui impose pas nécessairement la prise en compte de la chose précédemment jugée. Tout bien analysé, il s’avère que c’est la volonté des parties à l’arbitrage qui conduit l’arbitre à reconnaître la normativité des décisions puis à leur attribuer une certaine autorité, à cette fin, il devra d’abord s’assurer de leur régularité avant de s’interroger sur l’étendue de leur autorité.Le fondement subjectif de l’obligation pour l’arbitre de respecter l’autorité de la chose déjà jugée et l’absence de contrôle étatique conduisent toutefois à reconnaître à l’arbitre une vaste liberté dans le choix des règles ou principes applicables. Nous verrons toutefois qu’à condition de distinguer les différentes formes empruntées par l’autorité de la chose jugée, le traitement de l’autorité de la chose jugée par les arbitres internationaux, s’il n’est pas homogène, est loin d’être aussi chaotique que l’on pourrait le croire, mieux encore, il apparaît que des pratiques raisonnables peuvent souvent être distinguées. / The force of res judicata is consubstantial with the very idea of justice / is an integral part of the idea of justice. If arbitration is private and contractual justice – but “justice nonetheless” – it logically needs to deal with the force of res judicata. Firstly, the decisions issued by arbitrators need to benefit from this force; secondly; arbitral tribunals need to respect the force of previous judicial decisions. Our study focusses on the latter aspect. From the point of view of the international commercial arbitrator, the question of the res judicata effect of arbitral or court decisions poses interesting questions and presents challenges, primarily with regards to the autonomous position of the arbitrator entrusted with an ad hoc judicial task in accordance with the intention of the parties, the arbitrator is not a priori bound to considerations regarding the coherence of a specific legal order, social peace or the sound administration of justice… In other words, the jurisdictional character of the arbitrators’ mission alone does not necessarily force them to take into account the force of res judicata. All things considered, it appears that it is the intention of the parties in the arbitration process which leads the arbitrator to acknowledge the normativity of the decisions, and to attribute them a certain force. To this end, the arbitrator will be required to check their conformity before reflecting upon the scope of their force. The subjective basis for the arbitrator’s obligation to respect the force of res judicata and the absence of state control nevertheless invite to consider the arbitrator’s significant amount of leeway in choosing which rules and principles to apply. However, we will show that, provided that a distinction is made between the different forms taken by the force of res judicata, the treatment of the force of res judicata by international arbitrators, if not exactly homogeneous, is far from being as chaotic as one might think, indeed, it appears that reasonable practices can even be observed.

1 The purpose of this thesis is to discuss the main aspects of the Czech legal regulation of the arbitration proceeding under the view of the particular Western European national and international legal orders. By doing so, the author strives for critical review of the arbitration proceeding as per the Czech legal order under the worldwide perspectives and with the prism of modern Western European and world legal theory of the arbitration proceeding. The intention of such research is to determine if the contemporary Czech legal regulation of the arbitration proceeding is in conformity with the modern theory and practice of the arbitration proceeding. This thesis also aims to answer a question whether the Czech courts shall have the right to review the application of law by the arbitrators. The author is seeking to answer this question by comparing the the Czech, or rather Continental system of law with the law of England and Wales.