Independence and Impartiality in International Commercial Arbitration

Independence and impartiality are key to any judicial process. The dualistic nature of arbitration, i.e., being judicial and contractual, raises the question of how to set the standard of independence and impartiality in arbitration. On the one hand, arbitrators are decision makers similar to judges. On the other hand, they solve disputes outside the courtroom and are (often) appointed by the parties due to their individual expertise. Against this backdrop, this book analyses the state of play of independence and impartiality. It provides an overview of the current status of independence and impartiality applied in international commercial arbitration, focusing on case law from France, Germany, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The core themes are possible grounds for finding dependence and partiality and their streamline in theoretical standards of independence and impartiality. Additionally, consequences of independence and impartiality are addressed, including the obligation to disclose. This book is useful for practitioners and scholars alike. It may help counsels preparing a challenge, arbitrators defining their obligation to disclose, and scholars analysing independence and impartiality on a more general basis

Les rapports entre la justice étatique et la justice arbitrale : Etude comparative France-OHADA

Arbitration has been used to resolving cases appreciated by international trade actors. However, well-functioning depends upon state justice. Both devices should have maintain a fusional and competitive relationship. The unfolding of this relationship can reciprocally bring complications and mistrust. State judge is referee’s collaborator despite the spacing of reports in France and several other states in sub-Saharan Africa. These states recognize the explicit and implicit power of state justice during arbitration. This study approaches courts assigned to the arbitrator and judge during their challenge. In order to accentuate and sustain the smooth running of arbitration in France and Francophone Africa, this research has been focused on the issue of economic development. After listing realities hindering the flowering of arbitration in this part of Africa, some solutions have been proposed to preserve this method of dispute resolution of dysfunction.L’arbitrage est un moyen de gestion de litige apprécié et privilégié par les acteurs du commerce international. Son bon fonctionnement dépend de la justice étatique. Ces deux appareils doivent entretenir un rapport tantôt fusionnel et tantôt concurrentiel. Le déroulement de cette relation peut réciproquement susciter des complications et de la méfiance. En France comme dans plusieurs autres États de l’Afrique subsaharienne, le juge étatique est le collaborateur de l’arbitre malgré l’envergure de leurs rapports. Ces États reconnaissent à la justice étatique son pouvoir explicite et implicite durant l’arbitrage. La présente recherche et étude aborde la mise en œuvre des compétences respectives attribuées à l’arbitre et au juge durant l’arbitrage. Afin d’accentuer et de pérenniser le bon déroulement de l’arbitrage en France et en Afrique francophone, cette étude s’est attardée sur la question de l’arbitrabilité et du développement économique. Après avoir énuméré des réalités freinant la floraison durable de l’arbitrage en Afrique, quelques solutions sont proposées pour le préserver de tout dysfonctionnement

THE USAGES IN ARBITRATION

Defined as generalized practices with a legal force, usages play a significant role in arbitration. This role is due in particular to the limited legal provisions applicable for this alternative mode of resolution of disputes. One may observe this impact on the substance of the litigation. Usages are indeed rules of law as they produce legal effects. Even though statutes particularly recognize this role with respect to international arbitration, we suggest not to limit the impact of usages to this international context; this point of view may be explained in particular by criticisms to the dualism between domestic and international arbitration. One may also note the role of usages on the proceedings. This role produces various consequences on the arbitral procedure in particular with respect to the definition of the powers of the Chairman of the arbitral tribunal as well as in connection with the professional and social activities surrounding arbitration

O Favor Arbitrandum : Ensaio de uma teorização

A presente tese constitui um ensaio de teorização do favor arbitrandum. A tese, contrariamente a algumas posições doutrinárias sobre o tema, não encara o favor arbitrandum como sendo uma política legislativa ou judiciária visando a promoção da arbitragem. Antes, ela procura, a partir das suas manifestações legais e jurisprudenciais, identificar um princípio jurídico, determinando o seu conteúdo, os seus limites e os seus fundamentos. O princípio do favor arbitrandum revela-se plurifacetado e não apresenta um alcance idêntico nos diversos ordenamentos jurídicos estudados. O seu conteúdo pode ser apreendido em dois sentidos principais. Trata-se, por um lado, de um critério interpretativo-decisional em matéria de validade da convenção de arbitragem, da competência do tribunal arbitral e de validade ou reconhecimento da sentença arbitral. Por outro lado, o favor arbitrandum é um princípio jurídico supralegal que se expressa como directriz orientadora da actividade legislativa, e, do trabalho interpretativo e integrativo pelo julgador das normas relativas à arbitragem. O princípio do favor arbitrandum encontra fortes limitações que podem ser de carácter geral (v.g. a aplicação da reserva da ordem pública, a ofensa dos bons costumes, a fraude, etc.), inerentes ao procedimento arbitral (a falta pelo árbitro do jus imperium, as anti-arbitration injunctions ou a responsabilização civil do árbitro) ou relativas à qualidade das partes envolvidas na arbitragem (a impecuniosidade das partes e a imunidade de execução dos Estados). Quanto aos seus fundamentos, o princípio do favor arbitrandum assenta em fundamentos jurídico-políticos e dogmáticos. Os seus fundamentos jurídico-políticos relacionam-se com o desenvolvimento do comércio internacional, a necessidade de redução das pendências nos tribunais judiciais, a concorrência entre Estados no acolhimento das arbitragens internacionais e o favor accordandum. O verdadeiro fundamento dogmático do favor arbitrandum encontra-se no princípio da tutela da confiança

Remote hearings in international arbitration and due process or the right to be heard

This thesis aims at answering if a remote hearing conducted against the request from one of the parties for an oral hearing violates due process. This is done through the prism of civil procedure rules, ad hoc and institutional arbitration rules in England, Germany, France, Sweden, Switzerland and Portugal. Unlike the civil procedure rules, that for some ten years or more have allowed remote hearings (save for in Switzerland), both hoc and institutional arbitration rules make remote hearing a question of party agreement failing which it is for the discretion of the tribunal to decide. But there is one impediment here, article 24(1) of the Model Law and UNITRAL Rules article 17(3), which both entitles a party a right to an oral hearing, which in any event is what lawyers and judges generally prefer. The question then arises: what is an oral hearing? The analysis shows there is no definition in the civil ordinary proceeding rules of what oral means or that would allow an a contrario conclusion that would exclude remote hearings. The same is true for the arbitration acts governing ad hoc arbitrations. What an oral hearing is, appears instead of the functionality allotted to it which in general is to state the case, present the evidence and make the arguments. In this way the functionality has an obvious link to what due process require. All six jurisdiction are 1958 NY convention. Article V 1.(b) says that an award shall not be enforced or recognized if a party was not able to present his case. This protection has been the model for article 34 of the Model Law, which in its turn has influenced the national arbitrations statutes. So, if the videoconferencing allowed the party to present his case, no violation of due process has occurred. In any event, a decision by the tribunal to proceed on a remote basis against a request for an oral hearing should always, given that the tribunal always must factor in time and cost, be considered to fall within the procedure judgment rule, giving the tribunal a bona fide leeway to balance conflicting interests. An argument often raised against remote hearings is that it is more difficult to judge veracity and demeanor remotely. Behavioral science does not support that argument. Also, it has been argued that it is more difficult to cross-examine remotely. However, courts have generally accepted remote cross-examinations. So has also the ECtHR.Esta tese tem como objetivo responder se uma audiência remota contra o requerimento de uma das partes para a realização de uma audiência oral (i.e. presencial) viola due process, ou o processo equitativo. O que é realizado sob o prisma dos regulamentos de processo civil, regras de arbitragem ad hoc e institucional em Inglaterra, Alemanha, França, Suécia, Suíça e Portugal. Ao contrário dos regulamentos de processo civil, que durante cerca de dez anos ou mais permitiram audiências remotas (exceto na Suíça), os regulamentos de arbitragem ad hoc e institucional fazem da audiência remota uma questão de acordo entre as partes, caso contrário, fica ao critério da decisão do tribunal. Mas aqui existe um impedimento, o artigo 24(1) da Lei Modelo e o artigo 17(3) das Regras da UNITRAL, que conferem a uma parte o direito a uma audiência oral, que em qualquer caso é geralmente a preferência dos advogados e dos juízes. Surge então a pergunta: o que é uma audiêncial oral? A análise demonstra que não existe definição do que significa oral ou que permita uma conclusão contrária que exclua audiências remotas nos regulamentos de processo civil comum. Aplica-se o mesmo para a leis de arbitragem que regem as arbitragens ad hoc. O que é uma audiência oral, surge no lugar da funcionalidade que lhe é atribuída que em geral é expor o caso, apresentar as provas e apresentar os argumentos. Desta forma, a funcionalidade tem uma ligação óbvia com o que exige o due process. Todas as seis jurisdições fazem parte da convenção de Nova Iorque de 1958. O artigo V 1.(b) estabelece que uma sentença não deverá será executada ou reconhecida se uma parte não puder apresentar o seu caso. Esta proteção tem sido o modelo do artigo 34 da Lei Modelo, que por sua vez influenciou os estatutos nacionais de arbitragem. Portanto, se a videoconferência permitiu que a parte apresentasse o seu caso, não existiu violação do due process. Em qualquer caso, uma vez que o tribunal deve sempre ter em consideração o tempo e os custos, uma decisão do tribunal para proceder com audiência remota contra uma solicitação para uma audiência oral deve sempre ser considerada enquadrada na procedural judgment rule, dando ao tribunal uma margem de manobra de boa fé para equilibrar os interesses em conflito. Um argumento que surge frequentemente contra as audiências remotas é de que a veracidade e o comportamento são mais difíceis de julgar à distância. A ciência comportamental não suporta esse argumento. Além disso, foi argumentado que a contrainquirição é mais difícil à distância. No entanto, os tribunais geralmente aceitam contrainquirição à distância. Assim como faz o Tribunal Europeu dos Direitos Humanos

The Content of the Future Legal Regulation of the Gas Relations between Russia, European Union and EU Member States

There are two types of relations between Russia and European countries in the sphere of gas cooperation. The first type is dominant; it includes long-term contractual relations of Gazprom with the European enterprises. The second type is just emerging and comprises opening up of the respective markets, that is, direct participation of the European companies on Russia’s market and vice versa. However, the actual legal regulation of gas relations does not permit to satisfy the numerous interests of Russia, EU and its members in the natural gas domain. For Russia it is the augmentation of the gas production, attraction of the investments in this sphere. The EU cannot guarantee the energy security, the diminution of the gas prices, the creation of the pan European market and of the conditions of the sustainable development, the reinforcement of the EU positions on the external markets etc. The resolution of the problem could be the development of the relations of the direct participation of the companies on the markets: of Gazprom and other Russian companies on the market of transport, retail, distribution of gas of the EU and of the participation of the European enterprises in the production of gas on the territory of the Russia. The basis of the legal regulation of this type of the relations could be fixed in the international treaties between Russia, EU and the member-states, which will contain the provisions on concurrence, investments and commerce in the gas sphere. The regulation of gas relations between Russia, the EU and its members described could help to solve numerous problems. In terms of investments, it would create the necessary conditions for foreign companies’ activity in Russia’s gas production sector and in the EU retail market. This will be possible largely due to the proclamation of efficient dispute resolution and other guarantees. In terms of competition, the right to submit claims to arbitration, foreseen in the agreement, will play a key role in countering the abuse by antitrust authorities or antitrust violations by enterprises. The rules of cooperation of the treaty will serve as the foundation for the common market. They will also promote the increase in the number of producers, retailers and consumers. The derogations from the competition rules will be important for ensuring energy security and for the attraction of investment

Reasons in arbitral awards: Arbitration in Equity, Arbitration in Law and Arbitration Without Law in International Trade

Analysis of the need and scope of the reasoning of the arbitral award in arbitration in equity, arbitration in law with choice of applicable law on the merits and arbitration in law without choice of applicable law on the merits, and mechanisms of control of the unreasoned award.Análisis de la necesidad y alcance de la motivación del laudo arbitral en el arbitraje de equidad, el arbitraje de Derecho con elección de ley aplicable y en el arbitraje de Derecho sin elección de la ley aplicable, y mecanismos de control del laudo inmotivado

INTERDICTION DE SE CONTREDIRE AU DETRIMENT D\u27AUTRUI-ESTOPPEL

The theory of Estoppel, originating in common law, also draws its sources from the continental law system since the Digest of Justinian and the Majala of the Ottoman Era. There was already the rule “ venire contra factum proprium nulli conceditur” and the prohibition against going against one’s own act. The entrenchment of estoppel in English and American Law covers the absence of a general principle of good faith in contractual matters. It has an exclusive defensive function, however in American and Australian laws it is possible to use the mechanism of estoppel in an offensive way, which is based on an idea that a party must not allow damage to increase if he could reasonably attenuated it