Thesis (LL.M.). / Written for the Institute of Comparative Law. Title from title page of PDF (viewed 2008/07/28). Includes bibliographical references.

International commercial arbitration ('ICA') is typically characterised as a procedural alternative to litigation in national courts. The great majority of scholarly literature on ICA relates to its procedure, as opposed to substance. This is not surprising since, in ICA, the governing substantive law is usually the national law of some state. One might therefore expect that there would be no difference between the decisions of arbitrators and judges on matters governed by substantive law. However, this intuition remains untested. ICA exists outside the legal system of any state and is specifically adapted for the resolution of international commercial disputes. The decisions of international arbitrators are fertile ground for the growth of international (i.e., transnational) commercial law. A better understanding of arbitrators' decision making will therefore shed light on how international commercial law is likely to evolve. Such understanding would also enable both consumers and providers of arbitration services to make better-informed decisions. International arbitrators' decisions are not susceptible to traditional legal analysis because only a tiny, non-representative sample of arbitral awards is published. The researcher simply lacks access to the necessary data. For the same reason, quantitative statistical studies of arbitrators' decisions are unlikely to yield useful insights. This thesis adopts a sociological approach. It identifies social norms that constitute an incipient culture of ICA and assesses the effects of these norms on arbitrators' decisions on the merits. Part I consists of two case studies that focus on specific areas of contract law. These case studies, which employ standard comparative law methodologies, provide evidence that the outcomes reached in ICA do diverge from those reached in national court litigation, even when arbitrators and judges purport to apply the same substantive laws. Part II employs the sociological methodology of 'grounded theory' to explain this divergence. It analyses the writings of arbitrators, counsel and commentators in order to describe two classes of social norms: those arising from the institutional structure of ICA and those arising from the values shared by international commercial arbitrators. The thesis concludes by predicting, in general terms, the effects of these social norms on arbitrators' decisions on the merits. It also suggests the specific contract law doctrines that international arbitrators will tend to prefer. These doctrines represent a likely future of international commercial law.

Tant pour la jurisprudence (constitutionnelle et administrative) que pour une partie de la doctrine, l’encadrement de la passation et de l’exécution des contrats administratifs de l’État et de ses établissements publics ainsi que des marchés des collectivités territoriales et de leurs établissements relève du domaine du règlement. Et ce, car à l’origine, l’association du droit de la commande publique aux matières relevant traditionnellement du pouvoir réglementaire autonome, telles que la procédure administrative non contentieuse et l’organisation des services publics est un fait établi. Pourtant, le désordre normatif dans les sources législatives et réglementaires du droit des contrats de la commande publique est largement dû à la place marquée du pouvoir réglementaire. Malgré la consolidation jurisprudentielle de cette dernière, des textes législatifs destinés à s’articuler avec les textes réglementaires se sont multipliés, accentuant la complexité de la matière. En général, le mouvement ascendant des sources du droit des contrats administratifs de la commande publique dans la hiérarchie des normes ces dernières années, y compris sa dimension communautaire, exige l’intervention préalable du législateur. De la sorte, la réorganisation des sources textuelles du droit des contrats de la commande publique s’impose avec la plus grande acuité par la ré-détermination des fondements constitutionnels des compétences normatives en la matière et, consécutivement, des rapports entre la loi et le règlement en faveur de la première dans l’encadrement du régime de la passation et d’exécution des contrats respectifs. L’unification du fondement constitutionnel de la compétence de la loi en matière contractuelle sur le fondement de l’article 34 qui attribue au législateur le soin de déterminer les principes fondamentaux des obligations civiles contribuera décisivement à la cohérence et à la systématisation des sources du droit de la commande publique. Une fois la compétence de la loi sauvegardée, le règlement se limitera à son rôle habituel, à savoir, un rôle secondaire et subordonné à l’égard de celle-ci. / According to the case law of the Constitutional Council and the administrative courts as well as to some public law theorists, the definition of the rules governing the award and the performance of Government administrative contracts, administrative contracts of State-depended public bodies and public contracts of local authorities falls within the scope of the regulatory powers of Government. More specifically it is argued that public procurement law is part of the rules governing the procedure of administrative decision making and the organisation of public services which are matters traditionally reserved to the autonomous regulatory power. The lack of coherence within the legislative and regulatory sources of public procurement law is mainly due to the predominant role of regulations. Despite the latter’s consolidation by the French courts, the growing number of legislative texts intended to build a coherent set of rules in this field has become a source of complexity. The transformation of the sources of the law of administrative contracts in the last few years – including the Community law dimension – requires the prior intervention of the Legislature. Therefore, the provisions governing the law of public procurement contracts should necessarily be restructured. This could be achieved through the redefinition of the constitutional basis of legislative and regulatory powers in the field of public contract law and consequently through a new balance between law and regulation with the intention of safeguarding the predominance of the former. Drafting the rules on the basis of Article 34 of the French Constitution which enables the Legislature to define the fundamental principles of civil obligations will clearly contribute to a more coherent and systematic approach regarding the sources of public procurement law.. Should the powers of the Legislature be safeguarded, the regulations will then be confined to their usual role, which is secondary and subordinate to Parliamentary Acts.