Web 2.0 Regulation: A Risk Management Process

In order to describe the law relating to Web 2.0, we have to look at the normativity that really operates there. Effective norms engender strong enough risks for stakeholders that they find it in their interest to comply. State legislation is not the only thing that governs Internet activities; the normativity that governs the resources associated with Web 2.0 flows from what the technology permits and prohibits, and also largely from stakeholder practices. Configurations and practices create risk or shift risk onto others. However, state regulators may consider that the risks arising out of Internet activities are worrisome enough that the state should impose obligations on stakeholders and thus modulate what they can do online. Through their regulations, states create risks for stakeholders

Alternative Dispute Resolution: Toward a Clear, Reliable and Effective Dispute Resolution System in Saudi Arabia

Saudi Arabia has declared its post-oil economic plan: Vision 2030 seeks to make the Kingdom a global investment powerhouse and disentangle national economic growth from oil revenues. This dissertation argues that jurisdictions like Saudi Arabia that hope to foster hospitable environments for foreign investment and efficient trade systems must establish effective dispute resolution systems that all business parties can trust. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms fit perfectly in this context. ADR has become increasingly prevalent and popular around the world; indeed, arbitration and other means of ADR have become universal methods for resolving disputes in international commerce. Determining whether the current ADR system in Saudi Arabia can support Vision 2030 goals this requires comprehensive investigation and analysis. This dissertation thoroughly examines the reasons that many continue to perceive the Kingdom as inhospitable to ADR. identifying the root causes and analyzing their consequences. It also emphasizes the need for creating an effective ADR system in the Saudi jurisdiction. It evaluates the current status of ADR in the Kingdom by comparatively and critically analyzing the reality of ADR processes in the Saudi legal system and identifies possible strategies for expanding and improving ADR practices within that system. It offers multiple levels of analysis, comparing the Saudi system and experience to those of some leading jurisdictions around the world. The dissertation argues that, at the national level, implementing a clear and effective ADR system will benefit the public system of justice in many ways. The use of ADR in traditional courts via specialized public agencies as well as in other private bodies, if implemented within a clear legal framework, will, for instance, positively contribute to efforts to improve the justice system by reducing court caseloads and enhancing access to justice. The dissertation examines and answers the following research questions: (1) What is the current status of the Saudi dispute resolution system? (2) Does the dispute resolution system in Saudi Arabia need to find a better way ? (3) If so, can ADR contribute positively to the system\u27s reform? (4) What are the benefits of creating a clear ADR legal framework? (4) Should ADR be a part of the many legal reform initiatives concerning the justice system in Saudi Arabia? (5) What law and practice reforms will enhance the functionality of ADR instruments? (6) What lessons do the experiences of some of the world\u27s leading jurisdictions in the field of ADR provide? (7) What role can education play in the development of ADR in Saudi Arabia? (8) How can institutionalization contribute to the growth of ADR in the Saudi jurisdiction? (9) What aims should the Kingdom establish in this area and how should it endeavor to accomplish them? This dissertation fills the gap in the current scholarly literature by accomplishing several objectives. It highlights, for example, the importance of having a clear ADR framework, addressing the benefits of structuring and regulating ADR methods in the Kingdom. It also emphasizes that implementing an effective and efficient ADR legal framework will require reform in many areas. The dissertation consists of seven chapters. Chapter 1 serves as an introduction; it provides general background information regarding the subject of the dissertation, stating the central problem it addresses and specifying its aims. Chapter 2 conceptualizes the dissertation\u27s subject and examines the history and development of ADR in both the Saudi jurisdiction and several leading jurisdictions. It also explains the concept if justice in Islamic law, which is crucial to understanding the evolution of the Saudi system of justice and comparing current practice to its root. Chapter 3 provides a comprehensive critical analysis of arbitration-related law and practice in the Saudi legal system. Chapter 4 derives several valuable lessons from arbitration laws and practices in the United Kingdom and the United States. Chapter 5 comprehensively examines the role of education in the development of ADR in Saudi Arabia and discusses the findings of a survey conducted on ADR instruction in Saudi law schools. Chapter 6 analyzes the benefits of institutionalizing ADR in the Saudi legal system, outlining the improvements required to ensure effective implementation, examining why and how the Kingdom should take the steps in question, and identifying what it should seek to reinforce, alter, and avoid. Chapter 7 concludes the dissertation and makes recommendations

The enforcement of electronic arbitral awards in international commercial disputes under the New York Convention: The case of Dubai and DIFC courts

When arbitration is conducted online, some inherent, fundamental issues arise which could potentially undermine the enforceability of the final award under the provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards of 1958, the “New York Convention” (NYC). The study identifies four key challenges which a winning party seeking the enforcement of an electronic award according to the NYC might face with relation to the enforcement of that award: the validity of electronic arbitration agreements, the enforceability of consumer arbitration agreements concluded online, obstacles arising out of the conduct of the arbitration procedures online and the issue of electronic authentication of the final award. The study first critically analyses the NYC, to identify some key problems in relation to each of the said issues which might compromise or undermine the enforcement of awards rendered in online arbitration; it then makes suggestions as to some possible amendments to the NYC. The study then goes on to consider these issues in the context of the applicable law before the Dubai and DIFC Courts as the enforcement courts, to examine their ability to enforce such an award. The study concludes with several recommendations for both practice and law reform in the jurisdictions discussed, in relation to each issue. The study is original in that it is the first comprehensive analysis of all the said issues, from formation of the arbitration agreement, through various stages of online procedures, to the final enforcement of the award, within the examined jurisdictions. Further, the recommended changes would help to improve the efficiency and reliability of the courts of Dubai and DIFC with regard to the enforceability of an award given via online arbitration. This is a particularly important issue in light of the current and anticipated growth in the prominence of the identified jurisdictions as financial and business centres, the centrality of international arbitration to international business and the fundamental need for confidence in the enforceability of the courts and arbitration awards