Researching globalisation

Professor Janet Dine (Director of the Centre for Commercial Law Studies at Queen Mary, London) writes of the anger which led to her book on "Companies, International Trade and Human Rights" (Cambridge, University Press, 2005). Article published in Amicus Curiae - Journal of the Society for Advanced Legal Studies. The Journal is produced by the Society for Advanced Legal Studies at the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, University of London

Recent Developments in Inter-American Commercial Arbitration

Arbitration has become an effective procedure for resolving international commercial disputes in the Western Hemisphere. A framework of treaties exists, establishing substantive law and procedure for that purpose. The United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (1958) has been ratified by sixteen Western Hemisphere countries. The Inter-American Convention on International Commercial Arbitration (1975) has been ratified by thirteen countries. Furthermore, the World Bank\u27s Convention establishing the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes has been ratified by four Latin American countries and six anglophobe Western Hemisphere countries and it has been signed but not yet ratified by three countries in the Hemisphere… [N]ew developments in treaty and domestic law, together with an educational program of seminars… will lead to a greatly increased use of arbitration and other alternate dispute resolution procedures within the Western Hemisphere

Recent Developments in Inter-American Commercial Arbitration

Arbitration has become an effective procedure for resolving international commercial disputes in the Western Hemisphere. A framework of treaties exists, establishing substantive law and procedure for that purpose. The United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (1958) has been ratified by sixteen Western Hemisphere countries. The Inter-American Convention on International Commercial Arbitration (1975) has been ratified by thirteen countries. Furthermore, the World Bank\u27s Convention establishing the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes has been ratified by four Latin American countries and six anglophobe Western Hemisphere countries and it has been signed but not yet ratified by three countries in the Hemisphere… [N]ew developments in treaty and domestic law, together with an educational program of seminars… will lead to a greatly increased use of arbitration and other alternate dispute resolution procedures within the Western Hemisphere

International commercial arbitration in Kenya: is arbitration a viable alternative in resolving commercial disputes in Kenya?

Includes bibliographical references.The purpose of this paper was to determine whether arbitration is a viable alternative for resolving commercial disputes in Kenya. More so, because Kenya has adopted the UNCITRAL Model law, 1985 and revised the same in line with the model law, 2006. Furthermore, Kenya has set up the Nairobi Centre for International Arbitration, with an aim to promote and improve the conducting of arbitrations in the country. To answer the research question, the writer looked at the history of the arbitration law in Kenya, how the communities living in Kenya settled their disputes. In doing so, the writer looked at the dispute resolution mechanisms of the Kamba, the Kikuyu and the Kipsingis, all communities living in Kenya before the country was colonised by the British. We also looked at how the law of arbitration was introduced. Having established the basis of the Arbitration law in the country, the writer canvassed on the development of the law since independence in 1963 to the current situation. This included the support recently given to alternative dispute resolution mechanisms by the Constitution of Kenya as well as the establishment of the Nairobi Centre for International Arbitration. The writer also gave an overview of the role of the court in arbitration in Kenya, giving instances and examples at which the law envisages the involvement of the court in the arbitration process. Court supervised arbitration was also canvassed. The paper went on to look at the situation of commercial arbitration in two other developing countries in Africa, South Africa and Mauritius. It was found that Mauritius, which enacted its International Arbitration Act in 2008, has moved decisively to market itself as a viable, safe and prospective place of international commercial arbitration. It was also established that South Africa has not been able to review its Arbitration law, which was enacted in 1965. Last the writer looked at the opportunities, the benefits and the challenges that face arbitration in Kenya today. The research was limited by the fact that it was not possible to write about the practice of all communities in Kenya and therefore the three chosen were taken as samples to represent all the others

CISG Advisory Council Opinion No. 18: Set-off under the CISG

The CISG-AC started as a private initiative supported by the Institute of International Commercial Law at Pace University School of Law and the Centre for Commercial Law Studies, Queen Mary, University of London. The International Sales Convention Advisory Council (CISGAC) is in place to support the understanding of the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) and the promotion and assistance in the uniform interpretation of the CISG. This is the CISG Advisory Council's Opinion No. 18 on set-off under the CISG

CISG Advisory Council Opinion 20 : Hardship under the CISG

The CISG-AC started as a private initiative supported by theInstitute of International Commercial Law at Pace University School ofLaw and the Centre for Commercial Law Studies, Queen Mary, Universityof London. The International Sales Convention Advisory Council(CISGAC) is in place to support understanding of the United NationsConvention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) andthe promotion and assistance in the uniform interpretation of the CISG.At its formative meeting in Paris in June 2001, Prof. Peter Schlechtriemof Freiburg University, Germany, was elected Chair of the CISG-AC fora three-year term. Dr. Loukas A. Mistelis of the Centre for CommercialLaw Studies, Queen Mary, University of London, was elected Secretary.The founding members of the CISG-AC were Prof. Emeritus Eric E.Bergsten, Pace University School of Law; Prof. Michael Joachim Bonell,University of Rome La Sapienza; Prof. E. Allan Farnsworth, ColumbiaUniversity School of Law; Prof. Alejandro M. Garro, Columbia UniversitySchool of Law; Prof. Sir Roy M. Goode, Oxford, Prof. Sergei N. Lebedev,Maritime Arbitration Commission of the Chamber of Commerce andIndustry of the Russian Federation; Prof. Jan Ramberg, University ofStockholm, Faculty of Law; Prof. Peter Schlechtriem, Freiburg University;Prof. Hiroo Sono, Faculty of Law, Hokkaido University; Prof. ClaudeWitz, Universität des Saarlandes and Strasbourg University. Members ofthe Council are elected by the Council. At subsequent meetings, theCISGAC elected as additional members Prof. Pilar Perales Viscasillas,Universidad Carlos III, Madrid; Professor Ingeborg Schwenzer,University of Basel; Prof. John Y Gotanda, Villanova University; Prof.Michael G. Bridge, London School of Economics; Prof. Han Shiyuan,Tsinghua University, Prof. Yesim Atamer, Istanbul Bilgi University,Turkey, and Prof. Ulrich Schroeter, University of Mannheim. Prof. JanRamberg served for a three-year term as the second Chair of the CISGAC.At its 11th meeting in Wuhan, People’s Republic of China, Prof. Eric E.Bergsten of Pace University School of Law was elected Chair of the CISGACand Prof. Sieg Eiselen of the Department of Private Law of theUniversity of South Africa was elected Secretary. At its 14th meeting inBelgrade, Serbia, Prof. Ingeborg Schwenzer of the University of Basel waselected Chair of the CISGAC

CISG Advisory Council Opinion 21 : Delivery of Substitute Goods and Repair under the CISG

The CISG-AC started as a private initiative supported by theInstitute of International Commercial Law at Pace University School ofLaw and the Centre for Commercial Law Studies, Queen Mary, Universityof London. The International Sales Convention Advisory Council(CISGAC) is in place to support understanding of the United NationsConvention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) andthe promotion and assistance in the uniform interpretation of the CISG.At its formative meeting in Paris in June 2001, Prof. Peter Schlechtriemof Freiburg University, Germany, was elected Chair of the CISG-AC fora three-year term. Dr. Loukas A. Mistelis of the Centre for CommercialLaw Studies, Queen Mary, University of London, was elected Secretary.The founding members of the CISG-AC were Prof. Emeritus Eric E.Bergsten, Pace University School of Law; Prof. Michael Joachim Bonell,University of Rome La Sapienza; Prof. E. Allan Farnsworth, ColumbiaUniversity School of Law; Prof. Alejandro M. Garro, Columbia UniversitySchool of Law; Prof. Sir Roy M. Goode, Oxford, Prof. Sergei N. Lebedev,Maritime Arbitration Commission of the Chamber of Commerce andIndustry of the Russian Federation; Prof. Jan Ramberg, University ofStockholm, Faculty of Law; Prof. Peter Schlechtriem, Freiburg University;Prof. Hiroo Sono, Faculty of Law, Hokkaido University; Prof. ClaudeWitz, Universität des Saarlandes and Strasbourg University. Members ofthe Council are elected by the Council. At subsequent meetings, theCISGAC elected as additional members Prof. Pilar Perales Viscasillas,Universidad Carlos III, Madrid; Professor Ingeborg Schwenzer,University of Basel; Prof. John Y Gotanda, Villanova University; Prof.Michael G. Bridge, London School of Economics; Prof. Han Shiyuan,Tsinghua University, Prof. Yesim Atamer, Istanbul Bilgi University,Turkey, and Prof. Ulrich Schroeter, University of Mannheim. Prof. JanRamberg served for a three-year term as the second Chair of the CISGAC.At its 11th meeting in Wuhan, People’s Republic of China, Prof. Eric E.Bergsten of Pace University School of Law was elected Chair of the CISGACand Prof. Sieg Eiselen of the Department of Private Law of theUniversity of South Africa was elected Secretary. At its 14th meeting inBelgrade, Serbia, Prof. Ingeborg Schwenzer of the University of Basel waselected Chair of the CISGAC

CISG Advisory Council Opinion No. 19: Standards and Conformity of the Goods under Article 35 CISG

The CISG-AC started as a private initiative supported by the Institute of International Commercial Law at Pace University School of Law and the Centre for Commercial Law Studies, Queen Mary, University of London. The International Sales Convention Advisory Council (CISGAC) is in place to support the understanding of the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) and the promotion and assistance in the uniform interpretation of the CISG. This is the CISG Advisory Council's Opinion No. 19 on Standards and Conformity of the Goods under Article 35 CIS

CISG Advisory Council Opinion No. 17 Limitation and Exclusion Clauses in CISG Contracts

The CISG-AC started as a private initiative supported by the Institute of International Commercial Law at Pace University School of Law and the Centre for Commercial Law Studies, Queen Mary, University of London. The International Sales Convention Advisory Council (CISGAC) is in place to support understanding of the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) and the promotion and assistance in the uniform interpretation of the CISG.This is the CISG Advisory Council's Opinion No. 17 on Limitation and Exclusion Clauses in CISG Contracts

Role of UAE courts in international commercial arbitration

As a requirement for LLM (International Business & Commercial Law), School of Law, University of BedfordshireConcept of arbitration has been prevalent, historically, in the Middle East since the early days of Islam. The arbitral process has been problematic in the UAE however, it has not been until recently that the UAE has recognized the importance of arbitration as a powerful dispute resolution alternative and revised its legislation to accommodate the proceedings of domestic and international arbitration. In the past, foreign investors have been reluctant to select the UAE seat for their arbitration proceedings. There has been a perception that, as a general rule, the practice of international commercial arbitration in the Middle East is still in its infancy. The UAE is now demonstrating to the international community that it has the necessary infrastructure and laws in place to successfully count itself as one of the key arbitration players, alongside London, Paris and Hong Kong. This has been the result of the UAE updating their laws, reforming dispute resolution practice and procedures and through the establishment of key regional arbitration centres. The UAE's accession to the New York Convention was also seen as a significant step in demonstrating the UAE's commitment to foreign investors and the international community. Under Federal Decree No. 43 of 2006, the UAE managed to accede to the New York Convention. The UAE's accession is considered as a mile stone towards provision for a more straightforward arbitral process and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in other Convention states. As a recent development, the UAE has evidenced the joint venture between the Dubai International Financial Centre ('the DIFC') and the London Court of International Arbitration ('the LCIA'), in February 2009, to create the DIFC-LCIA Arbitration Centre ('the DIFC~LCIA'). The DIFC-LCIA operates alongside the longer-established Dubai International Arbitration Centre ('the DlAC'). Both offer their own procedural rules and regulations for the amicable settlement of disputes through arbitration. The Courts role is vital in an arbitral proceeding in any jurisdiction. Although arbitration is believed as a court-free, independent forum for dispute resolution; the court plays fundamental role to ensure that the arbitral proceeding is taking place in a moderate and independent decorum. The UAE Court's role towards the International commercial arbitration has been very problematic and the courts historically used to intervene in the arbitral proceeding over tiny issues. The new UAE arbitration laws has changed the situation and curtailed the courts powers to interfere the arbitral proceeding. At present, the arbitration in the UAE is more independent and straightforward. The proposed UAE arbitration law has much more similarities with the Model Law UNCITRAL and meets the International standards. A lot of work still has to be done in order to make the arbitration more independent, straightforward and friendly in the UAB. The Court's role is vital and is required to be more supportive then it is at present in the arbitral process