Cette recherche aborde un sujet complexe, qui est en plein débat doctrinal en droit de l'arbitrage international: L'arbitrage commercial international et les garanties procédurales. Au fait, l'arbitrage commercial international revêt le mode traditionnel des règlements de litiges du commerce international et des relations économiques internationales. À cause de l'hybridité de sa nature (contractuelle et juridictionnelle), il est le plus souvent préféré par les parties aux tribunaux étatiques. Cette faveur vis-à-vis de ce mode de règlements de litiges internationaux s'explique par le développement de l'économie internationale, par la globalisation du marché, par la conclusion de nombreuses conventions internationales en la matière, par la création des centres d'arbitrage, enfin par la modernisation des lois et règlements nationaux. En revanche, il est constaté que l'arbitrage souffre d'un déficit de prévisibilité et de certitudes pour les acteurs du commerce international. Que l'on songe seulement à la multiplication des rattachements législatifs et des contrôles judiciaires: conflits de lois, conflits entre les règles de conflits, etc. Nous avons démontré que la solution aux difficultés de la méthode conflictualiste serait l'harmonisation de la procédure arbitrale internationale et que ce mode de règlement de différends débouche de plus en plus sur le rapprochement entre traditions juridiques différentes (Common Law et droit civil).Toutefois, ce mouvement de convergence est loin d'être achevé. Beaucoup d'autres pratiques arbitrales continuent de garder l'empreinte de la diversité des procédures étatiques et celle des grands systèmes juridiques mondiaux. / This research work tackles a complex subject, which is in the heart of a doctrinal debate in International arbitration Law: International Commercial Arbitration and procedural safeguards. In fact, International Commercial Arbitration is a traditional method of dispute resolution in International Trade and International Economic Relations. Parties to a dispute would rather prefer this mode of dispute resolution to state courts because of its hybrid nature (contractual and judicial).One can explain this preference for this method of international dispute resolution by the development of the international economy, the market globalization, the conclusion of numerous international conventions in the domain, the creation of arbitration centers, the modernization of national laws and regulations. By contrast, one can note that arbitration lacks predictability and certainty for parties in International Trade. One can just think of the multiplication of legislative attachments and judicial controls: conflicts of laws, conflicts between methods of conflicts of laws, etc. We have demonstrated that the solution to the difficulties of the conflictualist method would be the harmonization of the International Arbitral Procedures and that this method of dispute resolution would lead, more and more to the approximation between different judicial traditions (Common law and Civil Law). However this convergence movement is far from being achieved. Many other arbitral practices do still keep the imprint of diverse state procedures and of major legal systems worldwide.

The diploma thesis on Arbitration procedure within international business transactions focuses on the place of arbitration procedure and its relation to the national system of law. The first chapter is concerned with the dispute resolutions within international business transactions. The thesis characterises the alternative dispute resolutions and defines the term of arbitration procedure within international business transactions. The basic characteristics thereof are specified and the theories which attempt to explain nature of arbitration are described - contractual, jurisdictional, mixed and autonomy theory. The term of the place of arbitration is defined in the second chapter as the real place situated in the territory of a particular state. This place is distinguished from the arbitration seat and from other terms which used to be confused with the place of arbitration. The arbitration seat is deemed to represent legal domicile of the arbitration. The system of law of the seat determines the legal regime of arbitration procedure. The thesis further describes two main theories dealing with the relation between the place of arbitration and the national system of law - seat theory and delocalization theory. The relation between the place of arbitration and the national system of law is also...

L’arbitrage commercial international est le mode alternatif de règlement de différends le plus utilisé dans le monde. Ce qui contribue notamment à en faire l’acteur principal de la diffusion des règles anationales telles que les principes généraux du droit, les usages du commerce international, ou encore la "lex mercatoria" qui sont souvent choisies par les arbitres en tant que droit applicable au fond du litige. Ce choix s’est étendu aux nouvelles règles élaborées par des institutions internationales privées telles que les Principes d’UNIDROIT relatifs aux contrats du commerce international. Une codification doctrinale conçue comme un instrument de "soft law" et qui trouve de plus en plus application dans la pratique arbitrale. Notre étude cependant montre que peu de sentences arbitrales rendues dans des affaires dont l’une des parties est arabe ont fait référence aux Principes Unidroit. L’explication n’est pas à rechercher dans une incompatibilité entre ceux-ci et le droit des contrats des pays arabes mais dans la méconnaissance de cette codification doctrinale par les juristes arabes. À cela s’ajoute un sentiment de méfiance à l’égard d’une manifestation de la soft law. Il convient dès lors de s’interroger sur les moyens qui permettraient aux Principes Unidroit de trouver leur place dans le droit et la pratique des pays arabes. / International commercial arbitration is the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) the most used in the world. Which contributes in particular to make the main actor of the diffusion of a-national rules as the general principles of law, usages of international trade, or the lex mercatoria, often chosen by the arbitrators as the law applicable to the substantive of the dispute. This choice was extended to the new rules developed by private international institutions such as the UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts. A doctrinal codification conceived as a soft law instrument, which is increasingly applied in arbitration practice. Our study shows, however, that few awards rendered in cases in which one of the parties is Arabic made a reference to UNIDROIT Principles. The explanation is not to look for in an incompatibility between them and contract law in Arab countries but in the ignorance of this doctrinal codification by Arab jurists and lawyers. Added to this, a feeling of distrust a manifestation of soft law. It is therefore necessary to consider the ways in which the UNIDROIT Principles to find their place in the law and practice of the Arab countries.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:24:19Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Thomas Law.pdf: 1275572 bytes, checksum: 98183030b6c760470e7582142b05e99a (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016-03-09 / This Master s Thesis focuses on the acknowledgement and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in Brazil, based on the theoretical and practical research in the fields of civil procedural law and international law, considering it includes a study on the different international laws, conventions and treaties on international commercial arbitration, as well as on the acknowledgement and enforcement of arbitral awards. The first part of the study refers to the events of direct enforcement and nationalization of foreign arbitral awards, according to the new legal provisions of the New Brazilian Code of Civil Procedure. The second part of the study covers the assessment of the ratification process of foreign arbitral awards before the Superior Court of Justice (STJ), considering Brazil s new Code of Civil Procedure, the new internal rules of the Superior Court of Justice, the Arbitration Law and the New York Convention. The thesis also covers two cases, specifically, judged by the Superior Court of Justice: SEC No. 2,410 (Ferrocarriles versus Supervia Concessionária de Transportes Ferroviário S/A) and SEC No. 826 (Ssangyong Corporation versus Eldorado Indústrias Plásticas Ltda). Finally, after the reflection on the research conducted, one argues nationalization of the foreign arbitral award is possible given the new provisions included in Brazil s new Code of Civil Procedure and the acknowledgement thereof by the Superior Court of Justice, in the possibility of nationalization of the arbitral award in the Appeal to the Superior Court of Justice No. 1.231.554 / A presente dissertação de mestrado trata do reconhecimento e da execução da sentença arbitral estrangeira no Brasil. É uma pesquisa teórica e prática das áreas de direito processual civil e direito internacional, uma vez que aborda as mais diversas legislações internacionais e convenções que tratam da arbitragem comercial internacional e o reconhecimento e execução dos laudos arbitrais. Na primeira parte do estudo, serão analisadas as hipóteses de execução direta e nacionalização do laudo arbitral estrangeiro conforme novos dispositivos legais oriundos do Novo Código de Processo Civil. Na segunda parte, será abordado o processo homologatório de sentenças arbitrais estrangeiras perante o Superior Tribunal de Justiça tendo em vista o Novo Código de Processo Civil, o novo regimento interno do Superior Tribunal de Justiça, a Lei de Arbitragem e a Convenção sobre o Reconhecimento e a Execução de Sentenças Arbitrais Estrangeiras ("Convenção de Nova Iorque"). Paralelamente, dois casos, em especial, julgados pelo Superior Tribunal de Justiça, são objeto de análise e investigação: a SEC n. 2.410(Ferrocarriles versus Supervia Concessionária de Transportes Ferroviário S/A) e a SEC n.826 (Ssangyong Corporation versus Eldorado Indústrias Plásticas Ltda). Por fim, após a reflexão do trabalho investigativo, propõe-se concluir pela nacionalização do laudo arbitral estrangeiro levando em consideração as novidades trazidas no novo Código de Processo Civil e o reconhecimento pelo Superior Tribunal de Justiça da possibilidade da nacionalização do laudo arbitral no REsp 1.231.554

Cette recherche aborde un sujet complexe, qui est en plein débat doctrinal en droit de l'arbitrage international: L'arbitrage commercial international et les garanties procédurales. Au fait, l'arbitrage commercial international revêt le mode traditionnel des règlements de litiges du commerce international et des relations économiques internationales. À cause de l'hybridité de sa nature (contractuelle et juridictionnelle), il est le plus souvent préféré par les parties aux tribunaux étatiques. Cette faveur vis-à-vis de ce mode de règlements de litiges internationaux s'explique par le développement de l'économie internationale, par la globalisation du marché, par la conclusion de nombreuses conventions internationales en la matière, par la création des centres d'arbitrage, enfin par la modernisation des lois et règlements nationaux. En revanche, il est constaté que l'arbitrage souffre d'un déficit de prévisibilité et de certitudes pour les acteurs du commerce international. Que l'on songe seulement à la multiplication des rattachements législatifs et des contrôles judiciaires: conflits de lois, conflits entre les règles de conflits, etc. Nous avons démontré que la solution aux difficultés de la méthode conflictualiste serait l'harmonisation de la procédure arbitrale internationale et que ce mode de règlement de différends débouche de plus en plus sur le rapprochement entre traditions juridiques différentes (Common Law et droit civil).Toutefois, ce mouvement de convergence est loin d'être achevé. Beaucoup d'autres pratiques arbitrales continuent de garder l'empreinte de la diversité des procédures étatiques et celle des grands systèmes juridiques mondiaux. / This research work tackles a complex subject, which is in the heart of a doctrinal debate in International arbitration Law: International Commercial Arbitration and procedural safeguards. In fact, International Commercial Arbitration is a traditional method of dispute resolution in International Trade and International Economic Relations. Parties to a dispute would rather prefer this mode of dispute resolution to state courts because of its hybrid nature (contractual and judicial).One can explain this preference for this method of international dispute resolution by the development of the international economy, the market globalization, the conclusion of numerous international conventions in the domain, the creation of arbitration centers, the modernization of national laws and regulations. By contrast, one can note that arbitration lacks predictability and certainty for parties in International Trade. One can just think of the multiplication of legislative attachments and judicial controls: conflicts of laws, conflicts between methods of conflicts of laws, etc. We have demonstrated that the solution to the difficulties of the conflictualist method would be the harmonization of the International Arbitral Procedures and that this method of dispute resolution would lead, more and more to the approximation between different judicial traditions (Common law and Civil Law). However this convergence movement is far from being achieved. Many other arbitral practices do still keep the imprint of diverse state procedures and of major legal systems worldwide.

At the dawn of democratic rule in the period 1994–1998, South Africa concluded 15 bilateral investment treaties (BITs), mostly with European nations. Some of these treaties were concluded before the Constitution of 1996. The country has since concluded a total of 47 BITs, with the majority not in effect as they were not ratified per the required constitutional processes. The policy decision to enter into BITs was taken by the African National Congress (ANC) government, led by the late former state president Nelson Mandela. The BITs were seen as an important guarantee to attract foreign investment into the country. The aim was to provide added assurance that foreign investments were safe in a democratic South Africa after many years of international isolation and sanctions. The conventional wisdom at the time was that BITs would increase foreign investor appetite to invest and the country would experience rising levels of foreign direct investment (FDI) as a result. This would facilitate economic growth and the transition of the country into the global economy. South Africa concluded BITs with seven of the top ten investor countries. In October 2013 the South African government cancelled a number of BITs with these European countries invested in South Africa. These countries – namely Belgium, Luxembourg, Spain, Switzerland, Germany and the Netherlands – complained of lack of consultation by the South Africans. On 1 November 2013 the Minister of Trade and Industry published, in Government Gazette No 36995, the Promotion and Protection of Investment Bill (PPIB or Investments Bill) as the proposed primary legislative instrument for the protection of foreign investments. This created much uncertainty among many European nations as well as in the United States of America (US), who were concerned about the motivation for cancelling bilateral treaties in favour of domestic legislation. BITs had been a part of the policy instruments regulating foreign investments in the country for over 20 years. Globally these treaties have been used to regulate foreign investments in a number of areas, and to provide protection to investments such as full protection and security, guaranteed pre-establishment rights, ease of repatriation of funds, most-favoured nation, fair and equitable treatment, national treatment and efficient dispute settlement mechanisms, among other provisions. In most cases international arbitration via the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) and other international arbitral mediums has been a standard provision in the treaties. This has allowed foreign investors to bypass host countries’ legal systems. The latter is believed to be a significant inducement for foreign investors, guaranteeing that should a dispute arise, or if an expropriation occurs, the investor could institute an international arbitral process against the host government. International arbitration is preferred by foreign investors for the reason that, in some cases, domestic courts may lack independence from the state, and may make partial rulings that do not protect investors. Furthermore, international arbitration processes are more efficient and produce rulings faster than domestic courts, which are usually burdened with bureaucratic procedures and limited resources. In cases where delay exacerbates injury, prompt resolution of disputes is preferable. This study evaluates the Investments Bill and the rationale applied by the government of South Africa to cancel BITs with major trade and investment partners in favour of this legislation. The thesis focuses on the Investments Bill, in light of the objective provided by the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) for its enactment to law. The Investments Bill is subjected to a constitutional analysis to determine its compliance therewith. Comparisons are also made between the Investments Bill provisions and the prevailing international law principles on foreign investments. The Investments Bill is then critically evaluated against emerging trends on FDI regulation on the African continent to determine its congruence or lack thereof with best practice recommendations at regional economic community (REC) and African Union (AU) level. The thesis concludes with a set of policy recommendations to the DTI on how to improve South African policies related to the regulation of foreign investments taking into account the national imperative as well as Southern African Development Community (SADC) and other broader African continental objectives of harmonisation of FDI regulation, including the Tripartite Free Trade Area (FTA) implementation. The timing of this thesis is significant for South Africa. It adds to various deliberations that are taking place as the Investments Bill is set to makes its way through the legislative approval processes in 2015. The Bill has been met with opposition from some segments of society. Others have expressed support – including several state departments, the ANC, the South African Communist Party (SACP) and other political formations. The summary of findings contained in the thesis will be presented to the DTI to influence policy directions of the state in terms of foreign investment regulations. Should the Bill be enacted, the Minister of Trade and Industry is required to promulgate the dispute resolution mechanism that will govern investment disputes. The findings of this study will be important to the determination of how such dispute resolution mechanisms may function. Furthermore, in 2010 Cabinet instructed the DTI to develop a model new-generation BIT Template to be utilised by South Africa, should a compelling reason arise to enter into bilateral agreements. The research results will assist policy-makers to develop policies that are consistent with and align with the overarching Africa strategy that has been heavily promoted by South Africa. The country faces a number of challenges, particularly those related to low economic growth, high levels of poverty, unemployment and record levels of inequality. The gap between the rich and poor, in terms of the Gini coefficient, was 0,67 based on the World Bank Development Research Group Report of 2010. It is reported as one of the highest in the world and is believed to have worsened since the dawn of democracy. / Public, Constitutional and International Law / LL. D. (Public, Constitutional and International Law)

Cette thèse est une étude comparative entre la loi française et la loi égyptienne ; elle porte sur le cadre juridique du cyber arbitrage dans le commerce international, ces termes signifiant la dématérialisation des procédures de l’arbitrage lequel représente un moyen alternatif pour régler les litiges commerciaux. La question est de savoir dans quelle mesure les règles de l'arbitrage traditionnel sont aptes à régir l'arbitrage dématérialisé et s’il faut créer pour ce dernier des règles juridiques spécifiques. La réponse à cette problématique s’articule autour de la possibilité pour toutes les règles de la législation d’adopter les nouvelles technologies. Notons que l’arbitrage dématérialisé est soumis à la même règle traditionnelle régie par la théorie générale des contrats, selon le principe de la volonté des parties, mais cet arbitrage se déroule hors la présence de ces dernières car par le biais de moyens électroniques. La procédure arbitrale aura lieu à distance, cependant, si au plan technique l'arbitrage en ligne se pratique aisément, il n’en va pas de même au plan juridique. En d’autres termes, l'arbitrage classique comprend pléthore de conditions impératives tant sur le fonds que sur la forme, conditions que l'arbitrage en ligne, en vertu de sa nature, ne réussit pas à satisfaire en totalité. Les deux lois comparées sont globalement convergentes et concordent avec les principes internationaux. Après une longue période de franche hostilité on note, dans les années quatre-vingts de la part des pays arabes, des changements dans leur attitude à l’égard de l’arbitrage commercial international. Toutefois, la loi française dépasse la loi égyptienne en matière électronique. / This thesis is a comparative study between French law and Egyptian law; it concerns The legal framework for cyber arbitration in international trade, these terms mean paperless arbitration procedures which represents an alternative way to resolve trade disputes. The question is to what extent the rules of traditional arbitration are able to govern dematerialized arbitration and whether to create it for specific legal rules. The answer to this problem is based on the ability of all the rules of law to adopt new technologies. Note that the dematerialized arbitration is subject to the same traditional rule governed by the general theory of contract, on the basis of the will of the parties, but the arbitration shall be conducted without the presence of the latter because through electronic means. The arbitration proceedings will be held remotely, however, if technically online arbitration easily practice it does not hold true in legal terms. In other words, the classic arbitration includes plethora of mandatory conditions on both the funds and the form, terms as online arbitration, pursuant to its nature, does not satisfy in full. Both laws are compared globally convergent and consistent with international principles. After a long period of open hostility there are, in the eighty years from Arab countries, changes in their attitude to international commercial arbitration. However, French law exceeds the Egyptian law on electronic material.

L’arbitrage commercial international dans lequel une des parties est étatique est aussi actuel que décrié. Les tribunaux étatiques doivent renoncer à leur pouvoir d’appréciation de la validité légale et de l’efficacité de la convention d’arbitrage commerciale internationale, même si cette dernière n’est pas conforme à leur droit national. On comprend facilement les problèmes de légitimité que pose cette convention vis-à-vis de l’État partie. La question des intérêts étatiques dans l’arbitrage commercial international représente des enjeux non seulement juridiques mais également économiques importants pour les États. Notre première partie est dédiée à l’étude des instruments juridiques favorisant, dans l’intérêt des États, l’extension de la validité de la convention d’arbitrage à l’égard de la personne publique ; tandis que la seconde partie aborde les délicates questions, soulevées lors de différends engagés, qui tendent à remettre en cause la validité ou l’efficacité de la convention d’arbitrage,  en raison d’allégations par la personne publique, de violations de certaines normes juridiques internes ou de certains changements politiques ou économiques. Depuis quelques décennies, la jurisprudence et la doctrine françaises prônent le fait que la convention d’arbitrage insérée dans un contrat international a une efficacité et une validité propres. Nos recherches nous ont permis de trouver le corps de règles et de principes fondant le cadre juridique de la convention d’arbitrage véritablement détachée de tout lien national avec les autorités et les droits nationaux, en démontrant par ailleurs l’inefficacité récurrente de solutions recherchées sur le terrain des conflits de lois de procédure ou par le recours aux tribunaux des États. Cette théorie est particulièrement mise en exergue lorsqu’une personne publique est partie à un arbitrage commercial international. Nous analysons de manière critique pour les intérêts des États, le recours à la protection diplomatique comme voie de substitution à l’inefficacité ou l’invalidité de la convention d’arbitrage. Le recours à l’exercice de la protection diplomatique est un recours extrêmement subjectif, car dépendant à la fois du jugement arbitraire de l’état protecteur par rapport à son ressortissant et de la puissance de cet État sur la scène internationale. Les opérateurs économiques ne sont pas en situation d’égalité lorsqu’il s’agit de juger de la bonne ou mauvaise exécution des obligations contractuelles relevant d’un contrat international, puisqu’il n’est plus question d’un recours objectif grâce au droit, mais une question de puissance entre États. D’autant plus que l’exercice de la protection diplomatique a souvent amené des conflits interétatiques.  Notre thèse défend la légitimité, la pertinence et les avantages de la convention d’arbitrage à travers le kaléidoscope de nombreuses sources juridiques internationales et au regard de la prévalence des intérêts étatiques. Même si cela peut paraître a priori paradoxal, il n’y a aucun paradoxe pour les États à s’engager de manière conventionnelle à renoncer aux pouvoirs discrétionnaires des juridictions nationales, au contraire les relations économiques internationales sont basées sur la confiance, la moralité et la loyauté, et l’arbitrage commercial international atteint cet objectif en offrant une voie de recours internationale judiciaire objective pour les deux parties. / The international commercial arbitration in which one party is a State party is as current as criticized. The State courts may have to give up exercising their discretion of the legal validity and the efficacy of the international commercial arbitration agreement, even if the latter does not conform to their national law. It is easy to understand the problem of legitimacy posed by this agreement opposite to the State party. The question of State interest in international commercial arbitration represents not only important legal issues but also economic issues for the State. The first part is dedicated to the study of the legal instruments favoring, in the interest of the State, the extension of the validity of the arbitration agreement towards the State; whereas the second part deals with the delicate questions raised during disputes which call into question the validity or the efficacy of the arbitration agreement, due to the allegations made by the public entity based on violations of certain national legal provisions or changes in economic or political circumstances. For a few decades, the jurisprudence and the French doctrine advocate that the arbitration agreement in an international contract has its own efficacy and validity. Our legal research has revealed the body of rules and principles basing the legal framework of the arbitration agreement detached of some link with authorities and with the national law. At the same time, we demonstrate the repeating ineffectiveness of the remedies sought on the ground of the conflicts of procedural legislations or by recourse to State court. This theory is particularly underlined when a public entity is a party to an international commercial arbitration. We critically analyze for the State interest, the exercise of diplomatic protection as a substitute remedy against the inefficiency or invalidity of the arbitration agreement. The exercise of diplomatic protection is highly subjective, because it depends simultaneously on the arbitrary judgment of the protective State with respect to its national and to the power of this State on the international scene. The economic operators are not on an equal footing while it is a question to rule the proper or improper performance of contractual obligations based on an international contract, because it is no longer a matter of an objective remedy through the right, but a matter of power between the States. This is all the more the case as the exercise of diplomatic protection has often leaded to inter-state conflicts. Our thesis defends the legitimacy, pertinence and advantages of the arbitration agreement through the kaleidoscope of many international legal sources and with regard to the prevalence of State interest. However paradoxical that might seem a priori, there is no paradox for the State to engage itself in a conventional manner to waive its discretionary power of domestic jurisdiction. On the contrary, the international economic relations are based on trust, morality and loyalty, and international commercial arbitration achieved that goal by providing an effective international judicial remedy for both parties.

Africa has always aspired for the economic integration of its markets. This endeavour is evident right from the 1960s clamour for independence and shortly thereafter, as newly independent states. During this period African countries under the umbrella of the OAU underscored economic cooperation as the basis for intra-African relations. However, it was not until the year 1991, with the conclusion of the AEC Treaty, that the continent formally adopted a framework and roadmap towards continental economic integration. The 40-year roadmap towards a continental economic community was premised upon the two principles of harmonisation and devolution. Moreover, the six-stage integration process set out in Article 6 of the AEC Treaty identifies the eight RECs in Africa as the building blocks for the continent’s proposed single market and economic union. It also underpinned the economic integration of the continent on the harmonious co-existence of the RECs. A step-wise ambitious integration model was adopted under Article 6 of the AEC Treaty. The model envisaged the creation of a Free Trade Area (FTA), followed by a Customs Union, a Common Market and ultimately a fully-fledged Economic Union. As a first step towards the continental integration, the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) was unveiled in 2018. Cross border, intra-African trade, is bound to lead to a rise in investment and commercial transactions on the continent. This, in turn, will inevitably lead to disputes which require resolution. The economic integration of the continent is fast evolving under the aegis of the AU; whose dispute settlement system is currently also under review. Significantly, the AU has consolidated its dispute settlement mechanism, following the merger in 2008 of the ACJ and ACH&PR, into a single AU court, known as the African Court of Justice and Human Rights (ACJ&HR). It is within the context of the merged AU single court that this thesis grounds itself. It seeks to interrogate the adequacy of the continental trade and investment dispute settlement system and examines its viability within the consolidated AU dispute settlement system. While the AU led continental economic integration gains pace, the dispute settlement system, critical for the integration, is either lagging behind or is not receiving adequate attention. As a result, the dispute settlement systems created under the AEC and AfCFTA are incongruent with the principles of harmonisation and devolution, which underpin the continent’s economic integration goals. The recommendations proffered, align with the philosophy of harmonising and devolving the continental trade and investment dispute settlement system. The research proposes to locate the continental trade and investment dispute settlement within the AU single court system. The principal recommendation is not only to expand the Court’s jurisdiction in order to accommodate the trade and investment mandate, but also to use sub-regional REC judicial organs as courts of first instance for the ACJ&HR. A hierarchical order of the continental court system, with the single AU Court at the apex, is also proposed in this study as the supreme overarching supranational judicial organ. / Public, Constitutional, and International Law / LL.D.

Foreign investments in SADC are regulated by Annex 1 of the SADC Protocol on Finance and Investments (SADC FIP), as well as the laws of SADC Member States. At present, SADC faces the challenge that this regime for the regulation of foreign investments is unstable, unsatisfactory and unpredictable. Furthermore, the state of the rule of law in some SADC Member States is unsatisfactory. This negatively affects the security of foreign investments regulated by this regime. The main reasons for this state of affairs are briefly explained below. The regulatory regime for foreign investments in SADC is unstable, due to recent policy reviews and amendments of key regulatory instruments that have taken place. Major developments in this regard have been the suspension of the SADC Tribunal during 2010, the amendment of the SADC Tribunal Protocol during 2014 to bar natural and legal persons from access to the Tribunal, and the amendment of Annex 1 during 2016 to remove investor access to international investor-state arbitration, better known as investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS). The regulation of foreign investments in SADC has been unsatisfactory, among others because some SADC Member States have failed or neglected to harmonise their investment laws with both the 2006 and the 2016 Annex 1. Furthermore, SADC Member States such as Angola, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Malawi, Mauritius, Seychelles, Eswatini, Tanzania, Zambia, and Zimbabwe have multiple Regional Economic Community (REC) memberships. This places these Member States in a position whereby they have conflicting interests and treaty obligations. Finally, the future of the regime for the regulation of foreign investments in SADC is unpredictable, due to regional integration efforts such as the recent formation of the COMESA-EAC-SADC Tripartite Free Zone (T-FTA) and the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA). The T-FTA is entitled to have its investment protocol, while the AfCFTA investment protocol will be negotiated from 2018 until 2020. These developments entail that the 2016 Annex 1 will soon be replaced by an investment protocol at either the T-FTA or AfCFTA levels, thereby ushering a new regime for the regulation of foreign investments in SADC. The unknown nature of the future regulations create uncertainty and instability among foreign investors and host states alike. This study analyses the regulation of foreign investments in terms of Annex 1 and selected laws of SADC Member States. In the end, it makes the three findings mentioned above. In order to address these findings, the study makes four recommendations. The first is that foreign investments in SADC must be regulated at African Union (AU) level, by means of an AfCFTA investment protocol (which incidentally is now the case). Secondly, investor-state disputes must be referred to the courts of a host state, optional ISDS, the African Court of Justice and Human Rights (ACJ&HR) or other agreed forum. Thirdly, an African Justice Scoreboard (AJS) must be established. The AJS will act as a gateway to determine whether an investor-state dispute shall be referred to the courts of a host state, ISDS, the ACJ&HR or other forums. Fourthly, the office of an African Investment Ombud (AIO) must be created. The AIO shall facilitate the early resolution of investor-state disputes, so as to reduce the number of disputes that may end-up in litigation or arbitration. / Mercantile Law / LL. D.