Cette thèse porte sur l’histoire de l’arbitrage commercial international, mode de règlement des différends par lequel les parties soustraient l’examen de leur litige aux juridictions étatiques et en confient la solution à une ou plusieurs personnes privées. Cette histoire peut être divisée en trois grandes périodes. Pendant « l’âge des aspirations » (des années 1800 à 1920 environ), l’arbitrage fut utilisé dans de nombreux contextes, tant sur le plan national (arbitrage corporatif) qu’international (arbitrage interétatique), ce qui a conféré certains traits caractéristiques à la pratique moderne de l’arbitrage commercial international. Pendant l’« âge de l'institutionnalisation » (des années 1920 à 1950 environ), des institutions clés, telles que la Chambre de commerce internationale et sa Cour d’arbitrage, furent créées, et on assista également à la mise en place de systèmes d’arbitrage institutionnels cohérents et efficaces. Enfin, l’« âge de l’autonomie » (depuis les années 1950) fut marqué par une spécialisation accrue et par les tentatives d’auto-instituer un corps de droit séparé et de justifier les fondements théoriques du système d’arbitrage dans son ensemble. Cette recherche démontre que l’histoire de l’arbitrage commercial international oscille entre des phases de « renouveau » et des phases d’« anxiété ». Pendant les périodes de renouveau, de nouveaux instruments, dispositifs et institutions furent conçus pour étendre la portée de l’arbitrage commercial international. De telles mesures furent contrebalancées pendant les périodes d’anxiété ou de remise en question, pendant lesquelles on chercha à limiter la place de l’arbitrage (afin, par exemple, de ne pas empiéter sur la souveraineté des États). Cette tension ou mouvement de balancier entre renouveau et anxiété est un trait caractéristique de l’histoire de l’arbitrage commercial international et permet d’expliquer les forces structurantes qui sous-tendent son évolution. / This thesis is an exploration of the history of international commercial arbitration—the mechanism by which the mutual rights and liabilities of the parties are determined with binding effect by a third person, the arbitrator, instead of by a court of law. It seeks to divide the history of international commercial arbitration into three broad waves or periods. In the Age of Aspirations (ca.1800–1920), arbitration was used in a range of contexts, both domestic (in local trade associations) and international (between states), as a result of which some of the defining features of modern international commercial arbitration practice were established. The Age of Institutionalization (1920s–1950s) witnessed the creation of key institutions, such as the International Chamber of Commerce and its Court of Arbitration, and the establishment of coherent and effective institutional arbitration systems. The Age of Autonomy (1950s–present) was marked by increased specialization and the attempt to create a separate body of law and justify the theoretical foundations of the arbitration system as a whole. The thesis argues that this history oscillates between moments of renewal and moments of anxiety. During periods of renewal, new instruments, devices, and institutions were created to carry international commercial arbitration forward. These initiatives were then counterbalanced during periods of anxiety, in which it seemed that international commercial arbitration should not go too far (lest it encroach on state sovereignty, for example). This tension or pendulum-like movement—from renewal to anxiety and from anxiety to renewal—is a key feature of the history of international commercial arbitration and helps explain the course of its development.

Peacekeeping, which was born as an innovation of the United Nations system in an ad hoc way, has transformed in the post-Cold War. In the post-Cold War era, the number of peacekeeping operations increased, new tasks were introduced and the end goal of the operations has changed. Besides, the prevailing understanding of UN peacekeeping has transformed thereby leading us to use the terms peacebuilding and peace operations rather than mere peacekeeping. While during the Cold War era, peacekeeping meant to supervise the ceasefire after interstate conflicts, in the post-Cold War era, peace operations have been mostly utilised in internal conflicts with a view to bring sustainable peace in the lands of internal conflicts. Furthermore, while during the Cold War era, peacekeeping mainly concerned peace/security and sovereignty upon the conflicts / human security and socio-economic development have been embedded into the agenda of peace operations in the post-Cold War era. This thesis offers two dynamics based on a normative change as the underlying cause behind this transformation. In the post-Cold War era, international norms have changed and brought a new parameter: internal conflicts are to be responded. Based on this normative change, the first dynamic is related with the challenge, which internal conflicts pose for peace operations, and the second dynamic is the rise of liberal internationalism, which tends to organise domestic realms of the states.

Economic globalization, the liberalization of markets, and the opening of once closed societies have all heralded the remarkable emergence of the current system of investment treaty arbitration. The current system, however, has attracted significant criticism and calls for reform. This thesis reviews the historical employment of arbitration in international society and the circumstances that lead to the emergence of the current system of investor-state dispute settlement. Following this, two recent proposals for reform of the current system are outlined: the creation of an international court of investment and the implementation of appellate mechanisms for investment treaty arbitration. The thesis concludes by offering an assessment of these proposals and argues for the rejection of the proposal to replace the current system with an international investment court, but offers a cautious endorsement of appellate mechanisms. / Graduate

Dans l’exercice de sa mission, l’arbitre se voit tantôt doté de pouvoirs analogues à ceux du juge étatique, tantôt de pouvoirs spécifiques, ou encore dépourvu de certains pouvoirs propres au juge. Ce triptyque résulte de la nature spécifique de la justice arbitrale. L’origine conventionnelle de l’institution retentit sur les pouvoirs de l’arbitre. Elle peut les étendre, mais également les restreindre. De même, l’aspect juridictionnel pose des limites aux pouvoirs de l’arbitre dans l’accomplissement de sa mission. Ce constant ne saurait pourtant signifier que les solutions relatives aux pouvoirs de l’arbitre sont toujours identiques en droit comparé. En effet, ces solutions dépendent largement des manières de concevoir le phénomène arbitral. Ainsi, étant donné que l’arbitrage est conçu en France comme un phénomène transnational, l’arbitre est autonome par rapport à tout ordre juridique. Par conséquent, il peut conduire la procédure et régler le fond du litige conformément aux règles qu’il estime appropriées. En revanche, les droits syrien et égyptien sont encore loin de cette représentation de l’arbitrage international. Selon ces droits, le siège de l’arbitrage se voit conférer un statut privilégié faisant un obstacle à la reconnaissance d’une autonomie suffisante au profit de l’arbitre. / In the performance of his mission, the arbitrator may have similar powers to that of a judge, he may enjoy specific powers, or he may be deprived of certain powers usually enjoyed by a judge. This trilogy is produced by the special nature of arbitral justice. The conventional origin of the institution controls the powers of the arbitrator. It may extend them, but also restrict them. The jurisdictional aspect also imposes restrictions on the powers of the arbitrator in the performance of his mission. All this does not mean that the solutions relating to the powers of the arbitrator are always identical in comparative law. In fact, these solutions depend largely upon how the arbitral phenomenon is visualized. In France, arbitration is conceived as a transnational phenomenon, the arbitrator is autonomous of any legal system, and therefore he can conduct the proceedings and decide the dispute in accordance with the rules he considers appropriate. In contrast, Syrian and Egyptian laws are far from this perception of the international arbitration. In these two laws, the seat of arbitration has a privileged status, which builds an obstacle to the recognition of sufficient autonomy for the benefit of the arbitrator.

En matière de propriété industrielle, alors que le contentieux relatif à l'exploitation contractuelle et à la contrefaçon est arbitrable de longue date, l'annulation des titres échappait à la compétence arbitrale. Cela donnait prise à des procédés dilatoires puisqu'une simple exception de nullité pouvait bloquer la procédure arbitrale. Un arrêt récent de la Cour d'appel de Paris a étendu la compétence arbitrale : désormais, le tribunal arbitral peut statuer inter partes sur une exception de nullité relative à un titre de propriété industrielle. Cette solution, bien qu'utile pour garantir l'efficacité de l'arbitrage, n'est pas exempte de critiques. Notamment, elle n'est pas conforme à la nature des droits de propriété industrielle qui sont efficaces à l'égard de tous et elle n'empêche pas le risque des décisions contradictoires et de titres « boiteux ». La présente thèse explore donc la possibilité de reconnaître aux arbitres compétence pour décider erga omnes sur la validité des titres de propriété industrielle. Plusieurs raisons ont été avancées pour fonder l'inarbitrabilité de la demande d'annulation de ces titres. En particulier, on considère généralement qu'une sentence arbitrale ne peut pas produire l'effet absolu attaché à une décision d'annulation. Cependant, les sentences arbitrales sont opposables aux tiers et un prétendu effet inter partes de la sentence ne peut pas justifier l'inarbitrabilité de la demande d'annulation. La raison profonde de l'inarbitrabilité actuelle, en droit français, réside dans la nature inter partes de la justice arbitrale internationale, qui ne prévoit pas de protection procédurale au profit des tiers intéressés par le sort du titre. Le domaine arbitrable pourrait donc être élargi à condition de garantir l'effet erga omnes de la sentence par la publicité de celle-ci et et de le contrebalancer par une tierce opposition limitée, moderne et adaptée à l'arbitrage international. Cette solution, si elle était acceptée par les droits nationaux, modifierait les conditions de l'examen de l'arbitrabilité, par le tribunal arbitral et par le juge étatique. / While the arbitrability of contractual and infringement disputes in the field of industrial property has been the norm for many years, validity disputes remained outside of the arbitral jurisdiction. This resulted in some delaying tactics since a simple nullity exception may block arbitral proceedings. In 2008 the Paris Court of Appeal extended the arbitral jurisdiction: henceforth, an arbitral tribunal may rule inter partes regarding the nullity exception on an industrial property title. This solution, protecting the efficiency of arbitration, remains questionable. In particular, it does not respect the nature of industrial property rights having an effect against all, and it does not prevent the risk of contradictory rulings and the inconsistent enforcement of industrial property rights. This study examines whether an arbitral tribunal shall have jurisdiction to rule on the validity of industrial property titles with an effect against all. Many reasons have been put forth to establish the inarbitrability of these disputes. In particular, an arbitral award shall not generate the erga omnes effect attached to a decision of nullity. However, arbitral awards are “opposable” against third parties and the so-called inter partes effect of awards shall not justify the inarbitrability of nullity disputes. The essential reason of inarbitrability in French law is, therefore, the inter partes nature of international arbitral justice, which does not provide a protection mechanism for interested third parties. The arbitral jurisdiction may be extended provided that awards have an erga omnes effect by way of publication, and that this effect is counterbalanced with a limited and modern tierce opposition procedure adapted to international arbitration. This solution, if accepted by national laws, would revise the conditions under which arbitral tribunals and national courts determine arbitrability.

Nowadays, with the development of international economy, international investment has become one of the most important ways to prompt global economic development. The number of the bilateral treaties (BITs) and multilateral treaties are increasing as well. These treaties are an important basis for resolving disputes between investors in international arbitration. Many treaties contain a sunset clause. In the field of international law, the use and utility of sunset clauses has remained largely unnoticed despite the fact that they have been employed in major international treaties and agreements.  Nowadays, such clauses have become a core feature in international investment agreements, playing an underappreciated role with the ability to enhance legal certainly in regards to the tension between stability and flexibility. Moreover, sunset clauses complement the protection to investors with the entrenchment effect.  But meanwhile, as one of the important economic entities in the global economic development, the European Union (EU) is trying to terminate all intra-EU BITs, as well as the sunset clauses which contained in the BITs.  This thesis analyse the impact of the sunset clause on intra-EU arbitration after the EU members terminated their intra-EU BITs. Trying to clarify the nature and the utility of the sunset clause in EU law, and try to disengage from the entrenchment effect of the sunset clause at EU and international level.

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.

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 aim of the thesis is to define the cathegory of peremptory rules in private international law and to describe their specific use in the commercial domain compared to business to consumer contractual relations. The reason for my research was my concern for the conflict between the formal possibility to conclude a contract and the actual enforceability of the contractual claims before a court or before alternative dispute resolution bodies in the domain of private international law. A major part of the thesis uses an analytical approach and a grammatical, teleological and logical interpretation of the mentioned legal instruments. The final part is grounded on the legal comparation of several laws across different countries and thus demonstrating how different approaches to peremtory rules may influence the actual interpetation of various legal relations and the contractual liberty in general. The thesis is composed of four chapters and a conclusion. To begin with, the first chapter focuses on the peremptory rules in international commercial relations as a whole. It aims to define the core notion of the peremptory rules. It also reals with a personal and material scope of the thesis - the particularities of commercial relations. Furthermore, the second chapter examines the application of the...

A eqüidade é um termo polissêmico e comporta diversas definições. Nesta obra, estudam-se as decisões por eqüidade na arbitragem comercial internacional e não a eqüidade em todos seus aspectos. Trata-se da função substitutiva da eqüidade. A decisão por eqüidade na arbitragem apresenta-se como uma técnica: uma forma de decidir sem que haja remissão necessária ao direito positivo. Sua característica principal é a liberdade de método decisório. Seu principal efeito é a possibilidade de derrogar o direito positivo, dentro dos limites da ordem pública. Ela qualifica-se, do ponto de vista positivo, como uma técnica de decisão; do ponto de vista negativo, como uma abdicação do julgamento conforme regras de direito. Em termos históricos, a decisão por eqüidade na arbitragem existe desde pelo menos a Grécia antiga. Desde então, ela sobrevive na tradição jurídica ocidental. Nos dias atuais, ela é encontrada na imensa maioria dos ordenamentos. Boa parte de sua disciplina atual no mundo decorre do movimento de reforma das legislações nacionais ocorrido nas últimas décadas, que teve na Lei Modelo da CNUDCI uma importante fonte de inspiração. A arbitragem por eqüidade é uma espécie do gênero arbitragem. Embora possua diversas denominação no mundo, tais diferenças não encerram diversidade de conceitos. Em termos de qualificação da cláusula de arbitragem por eqüidade, existem divergências: pode-se relacioná-la à cláusula arbitral, ao procedimento ou ao mérito. Nesta obra, defendemos seu posicionamento nos domínios da cláusula arbitral, embora possua efeitos processuais. Nos dias de hoje, pode-se afirmar a existência de regras materiais transnacionais depreendidas do exame do direito comparado e jurisprudência arbitral, especificamente para a arbitragem por eqüidade. A cláusula de arbitragem por eqüidade produz efeitos tanto no direito material quanto no procedimento. No direito material, possibilita-se a derrogação do direito positivo. No direito processual, tanto pode causar alterações automáticas do procedimento como conferir maior liberdade aos árbitros na condução da arbitragem. Resta dúvidas se autoriza modificações no procedimento convencionado pelas partes. Também é controversa a possibilidade de se decidir por eqüidade questões prévias ao mérito, como a validade da cláusula arbitral. A decisão por eqüidade é limitada pela ordem pública e pelo princípio do devido processo. Com relação ao contrato, existem divergências sobre seu alcance. Todavia, pode-se verificar a sedimentação de um entendimento pelo qual os árbitros podem moderar certas disposições contratuais que produzam resultados injustos; todavia, não podem alterar substancialmente a economia do contrato. Do exame de direito comparado, existem três sistemas de arbitragem por eqüidade. Na imensa maioria dos casos, permitir-se-á desde que as partes assim convencionem. Presume-se, portanto, a arbitragem de direito. Um segundo sistema, utilizado por alguns países Latino-Americanos, presume que a arbitragem seja por eqüidade, salvo convenção das partes. Um terceiro sistema, adotado por poucos países, não permite a arbitragem por eqüidade. Os tratados internacionais em geral não tratam da arbitragem por eqüidade. Aqueles que o fazem, em geral apresentam uma regra material: permitem-na, desde que as partes convencionem. Nesta obra, realizou-se um exame da jurisprudência arbitral e uma pesquisa empírica com 92 profissionais que atuam na arbitragem comercial internacional em diversos países. De seu exame, podem-se identificar alguns elementos recorrentes na prática da arbitragem por eqüidade no mundo. Esses elementos ajudam a desvendar as formas e limites da arbitragem do instituo, bem como o que tem sido compreendido como equitativo no domínio da arbitragem comercial. Em outras palavras, o \"justo no comércio internacional\". / Equity is a polissemic term and comprises several definitions. This work focus on ex aequo et bono (sometimes referred to as in \"equity\") decisions rendered in international commercial arbitration, and not on the term \"equity\" as a whole. It is about the equity substitutive function. The equity decision rendered in arbitration procedures presents itself as a technique: A way to decide without reference to positive law. Its main characteristic is the freedom of the decision method. Its main effect is the possibility to repeal the positive law, within the public order/ordre public limits. It is qualified, from a positive point of view, as a decision technique; from a negative point of view, as an abdication of judgment according to the rules of law. In historical terms, ex aequo et bono decision in arbitration exists at least since Ancient Greece. Since then, it survives in the occidental legal tradition. Nowadays, it is found in most part of the legal systems. Good part of its current discipline in the World results from the national legislation reformulation movement occurring in the last decades, which was greatly inspired by the UNCITRAL Model Law. Arbitration ex aequo et bono (amiable composition) is a type of arbitration. Although it has several different legal frameworks in the world, such differences do not imply a diversity of concept or nature. In terms of qualification of the amiable composition c1ause, there are divergences: It may be related to the arbitration c1ause, to proceeding or to merits. This work submits its positioning in the arbitration c1ause, in spite of its procedural effects. Nowadays, it may be affirmed the existence of transnational material rules applicable to arbitration ex aequo et bono (amiable composition) arising out of comparative law and case law analysis. The ex aequo et bono (amiable composition) c1ause produces both substantive and procedural effects. In the substantive law, it is possible to repeal the positive law. In procedural law, it may cause automatic alterations in the proceeding, such as granting a greater freedom to the arbitrators in the conduction ofthe arbitration. It is still unc1ear if it authorizes modifications in the proceeding agreed by the parties. It is also controversial the possibility to render ex aequo et bono decisions in relation to those matters prior to the merit, such as the arbitration c1ause validity. The decision ex aequo et bono is limited by the public order/ordre public and due process. There are divergences regarding its effects in relation to the contracts (and parties\' will more generally). However, there seems to be an understanding according to which the arbitrators may mitigate certain contractual provisions producing unfair results; nevertheless, they may not substantially modify the contractual economy. According to a comparative law analysis, there are three \"systems\" for ex aequo et bono c1auses. In most of the cases, such kind of arbitration is permitted, provided that the parties so agree. It is therefore presumed the arbitration at law. A second system, used by some Latin-American countries, provides for ex aequo et bono decision as the default rule for arbitration, except as otherwise agreed by the parties. A third system, adopted by a few countries, does not allow this kind of arbitration. International treaties, in general, do not deal with arbitrations ex aequo et bono. Those which so deal with it, in general, present a material rule: decisions ex aequo et bono are permitted, if the parties so agree. This work analyzes the case law related to ex aequo e bono arbitration and performs a field research with 92 professionals acting in the international commercial arbitration field in several countries. From such analysis, it can be identified some common features in the worldwide arbitration practice. Such elements help c1arify the ways and limits of this kind of arbitration, as well as what has been understood as equitable within the commercial arbitration context. In other words, what is \"fair\" in international trade.