No description available.

No description available.

Note: Extra Large

Note:

No description available.

No description available.

Groups of companies offer considerable economic and practical advantages over other forms of business organizations. However, the phenomenon creates a long list of problems in terms of antitrust law, tax law, labour law, corporate law, and in the case of international companies, conflict of laws. National laws do not provide a complete solution to these problems because groups of companies are still governed by traditional corporate law, which is designed to govern single independent companies. On the other hand, harmonization of the law of corporate groups across Common legal systems is neither feasible not advisable. The most important problem which has not yet been completely solved by Common law systems is the liability of groups of companies for the debts of their subsidiaries. This has been described as "one of the great unsolved problems of modern company law". The present study aims to analyse the solutions provided by Common law systems to this problem and evaluate if they provide a solid settlement or whether further safeguards are needed for those dealing with corporate groups, namely minority shareholders and outsiders including creditors. By using a comparative approach with the Islamic law system, the study evaluates if the Common law solutions are also applicable in such a religious system or whether, due to its unique character Islamic law needs to create its own solution. This comparative approach assesses the possibilities of harmonization between Common law and Islamic law systems and promotes the Islamisation of modern laws in Islamic countries.

Following the Aramco arbitration in 1963, Saudi Arabia’s approach to international arbitration resulted in a reputation for being an arbitration unfriendly country. This was addressed to some extent by the Arbitration Law of 1983. However, arbitration under the 1983 law remained dependent on the approval of the national courts. With too much scope for judicial intervention, the legal framework undermined the final and binding nature of the award, constrained party autonomy and created inefficient delays. In 2012, a new Law of Arbitration was passed to replace the 1983 law with a legal framework intending to meet the needs of international commercial parties. The question addressed by this thesis is whether the Arbitration Law of 2012 (SAL 2012) succeeds in creating a legal framework that is consistent with the three core principles that provide the foundations for modern international commercial arbitration. These core principles of party autonomy, procedural justice and cost-effectiveness were used as normative tools for assessing the provisions of the SAL 2012, which were based on the UNCITRAL Model Law. Relying on those principles, the SAL 2012 was subjected to a comparative legal analysis, using the Model Law and the Arbitration (Scotland) Act 2010 as comparators. Although hampered by a lack of available case law involving the SAL 2012, the analysis concluded that the SAL 2012 is a very significant development, providing a legal framework that facilitates arbitration, encourages a pro-arbitration culture and achieves a balance between the three core principles that should meet the needs of international commercial parties. Despite this, the law could be further reformed to make Saudi Arabia even more attractive as a location for arbitration. While acknowledging that future reform should be guided by empirical research on arbitration in Saudi Arabia, proposals were made for the further development of a pro-arbitration legal framework.

The international civil aviation system is currently going through a transitional phase. Deregulation and liberalization of air transport services and privatisation of certain airlines have contributed to the modification of the aviation landscape. In this context, airline alliances play a crucial role. Both the US and EC authorities have been supportive of airline alliances because they believe that alliances have the potential to increase competition and to provide the consumers with benefits. / The first part of this thesis intends to provide economic and historical background to highlight the reasons for the multiplication of alliances, as well as the political and economic circumstances under which competition authorities assess alliances. The second part of this thesis is meant to determine which legal regime is applied to transatlantic alliances, and whether alliances are assessed like agreements among companies in any other business sector. The third part focuses more specifically on the antitrust control of the Sky Team alliance which occurs in the context of the EU/US Open skies agreement.

No description available.