ARBITRATION JUDICIARY – NEW QUALITY OF DISPUTE RESOLUTION

Arbitration judiciary, often referred to as arbitration, is commonly presented in the literature as one of the alternative methods of dispute resolution. The objections to the irregularities of the judicial state system and legitimate expectations in terms of reducing the time and costs of the proceedings guarantee the parties real access to court and protection of their rights by drawing up an arbitration clause. As part of the mutual relations of arbitration with respect to alternative dispute resolution methods, it should be emphasized that arbitration is a real alternative to the state justice administered by the common courts. It is also worth pointing to the possibilities and the need for disputes resolution by arbitration constituting as an important addition to the course of justice made by courts. The consistent intention to resolve the conflict reflected in the arbitration agreement and the exceptional opportunities for the parties to participate in the arbitration proceedings constitute a new content of the culture and legal awareness of citizens and the creation of modern mutual relations between the parties of broadly understood civil law relations. An arbitration clause, the implementation of arbitration proceedings and the resolution of a dispute within the framework of arbitration may and should therefore constitute a new quality in the administration of justice.

Harmonizing Commercial and Investment Arbitration: Conflict Dynamics

This article provides an independent analysis of the scope and extent of arbitration under investment agreements, and the implications of the possible convergence in the process of harmonization of international commercial arbitration law.The successful settlement of any dispute depends on the compatibility of the nature of the dispute with the technique to which it is submitted for resolution. In the last decade, there was a constant increase in the number of disputes that were subjected to arbitration and a major chunk of those disputes covered a comparatively new but known area called international investment law. With economic globalization allowing the free flow of foreign direct investment (FDI) in and out of a country, the existing regulatory framework in international law to standardize investment liberalization is often seen as ineffective, hence the consequent disputes. Here, arbitration offers a suitable framework for the amicable settlement of commercial disputes covering investment agreements with the assistance of bilateral or multilateral agreements between the states. Preferential trade agreements pertaining to investment often contain an arbitration clause for the settlement of future disputes between parties. At this juncture, one may find that there exists a fundamental dilemma in ascertaining the true nature of investment arbitration and how it is different from commercial arbitration. For example, the protection being offered to human rights under the purview of investment arbitration may generate doubts in the minds of investment arbitrators. In commercial arbitration, divergences in a pluralistic order become particularly relevant whereas the diverse legal cultures supported by individual constitutional frameworks have a direct impact on investment arbitration due to their practical application. The article also discusses the need for harmonized rules governing arbitration procedures while maintaining the functional dissimilarities between commercial and investment arbitration.

Various Clauses in a Cross-Border Commercial Representation Agreement

The paper is devoted to certain types of clauses in a cross-border commercial representation agreement. Particular attention is given to a non-competition clause, compensation clause, a clause on limiting the scope of the contract to a certain category of consumers, anti-corruption clause, applicable law clause, jurisdiction clause, arbitration clause. The paper examines the issue of the possibility of including certain clauses in a cross-border commercial representation agreement and the ratio of the conditions included in the agreement with the possibility of their execution within the framework of the legislation of the respective state. The analysis of the clauses was carried out on the basis of such documents as the Liner Agreement of the Federation of National Associations of Ship Brokers and Agents; Model Commercial Agency Contract Prepared by the International Chamber of Commerce; Baltic and International Maritime Council Dispute Settlement Terms 2016; General Agency Agreement prepared by the Federation of National Associations of Ship Brokers and Agents, etc.

YURIDIKSI PENGADILAN DAN ARBITRASE DALAM MEMERIKSA SUATU SENGKETA DIKAITKAN DENGAN PRINSIP COMPETENCE -COMPETENCE DAN KLAUSUL ARBITRASE

The doctrine of the principle of competence explains that arbitration which has jurisdiction in the statement itself is based on the authority to hear and decide an arbitration dispute. The authority possessed by Arbitration even though there is an arbitration clause in a belief as a way of resolving disputes arising in the agreement. The determination of the arbitration authority is related to the validity of an arbitration clause or their agreement arbitration agreement which makes the agreement in question regarding this matter The legal problems in this research relate to the norm vacancies regarding the competence-competence principle in Law No. 30 of 1999 concerning Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution (hereinafter abbreviated as AAPS Law).Solving research problems using normative legal methods with a legal approach, cases, and analysis of legal concepts.

ARBITRATION TO RESOLVE DISPUTES OF INTERNATIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE CONTRACTS

The judiciary is the natural way to resolve disputes and the means of establishing justice in society among its various members, because the judiciary is a manifestation of state sovereignty and can only be exercised by the public authority of the State. Since Iraq is one of the states that adopt a system of double law and justice and enshrined its constitution and laws, the adjudication of disputes in which the administration as a governing body exists is a public authority of the administrative judiciary, as the subject of the dispute was based on a single act, but in the view of the ordinary judiciary, it was a contract. The refore, the need for a more effective and effective approach to the implementation of the agreement sought to ensure that the parties are able to meet the needs of the international community. Common law people as a public authority, and although some jurisprudence is opposed to the inclusion of the arbitration clause in administrative contracts in general and administrative contracts of a particularinternational nature, economic and social changes have made it imperative to resort to it, which has led to increased interest in alternative methods of resolving disputes in various legal and judicial systems.

The Limits of Arbitration Law in Addressing Cultural Diversity: The Example of Ismaili Arbitration in the United Kingdom

This article studies religious arbitration from the perspective of global legal pluralism, which embraces both normative plurality and cultural diversity. In this context, the article considers that UK arbitration law regulates both commercial and religious arbitration while relying on a monist conception of arbitration. It further identifies two intertwined issues regarding cultural diversity, which find their source in this monist conception. Firstly, through the study of Jivraj v. Hashwani ([2011] UKSC 40), this article shows that the governance of religious arbitration may generate a conflict between arbitration law and equality law, the avoidance of which can require sacrificing the objectives of one or the other branch of law. The Jivraj case concerned an Ismaili arbitration clause, requiring that all arbitrators be Ismaili—a clause valid under arbitration law but potentially not under employment-equality law. To avoid such conflict, the Supreme Court reduced the scope of employment-equality law, thereby excluding self-employed persons. Secondly, based on cultural studies of law, this article shows that the conception of arbitration underlying UK arbitration law is ill-suited to make sense of Ismaili arbitration. In view of these two issues, this article argues that UK arbitration law acknowledges normative multiplicity but fails to embrace the cultural diversity entangled therewith.

Binding non-signatories to arbitrate—the United States approach

Parties’ consent to the arbitration is the basis for tribunal’s authority to decide the case and, as such, is of fundamental importance in any arbitration proceedings. Commercial reality, however, often requires from the so called ‘non-signatories’ of the contract containing an arbitration clause to participate in performance of such contract. Being sensitive to such commercial concerns, the US courts have developed different domestic theories for binding the non-signatories. Recent ruling of the US Supreme Court holds that such domestic theories are also applicable in cases governed by Chapter 2 of the Federal Arbitration Act (incorporating New York Convention). However, the Supreme Court did not resolve the question which law should be applied to the issue of binding the non-signatories. Although US courts might be more inclined to apply federal principles to this issue, this is not the only possible solution based on the current SCOTUS case-law. The US court could also resort to the choice of law analysis and apply appropriate (foreign) state principles for binding the non-signatories. However, different states clearly have different views of the issue of binding the non-signatories, as this article briefly outlines. Thus, the same factual pattern might lead to completely different results.