Interim Measures are viewed as an essential means to protect parties‘ rights in international commercial arbitration disputes. Most Arbitration Laws and Rules have recognised the arbitral tribunal‘s power to grant such measures. The success of this system relies on the court‘s assistance of the tribunal during the process. This relationship between the tribunal and the court is something vague under Egyptian Law, since there are no clear rules addressing the matter. Hence, this research examines the theories that explain the tribunal‘s authority and the relationship with the authority of the court. This study uses a comparative analytical approach in terms of analyzing relevant legal texts to determine the optimal legal approach to the issue. The purpose of the study is to address deficiencies in the Egyptian law – the Code of Civil Procedure and Egyptian Arbitration Law – and compare it with English, Scottish Arbitration Acts and international arbitration systems, laws, and practices. The findings of this research offer several recommendations that could help achieve a successful and smooth arbitration process. This study identifies and explains types of interim measures and explores the international practice of every type. It gives some important recommendations for future development and improvement of the Egyptian law. It also makes general recommendations that would help improve the efficiency of the English and Scottish laws.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:bl.uk/oai:ethos.bl.uk:581900 |
| Date | January 2013 |
| Creators | Shalaan, Wael S. E. |
| Contributors | Davidson, Fraser |
| Publisher | University of Stirling |
| Source Sets | Ethos UK |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Electronic Thesis or Dissertation |
| Source | http://hdl.handle.net/1893/17593 |
Page generated in 0.0203 seconds