scholarly journals A Chinese Approach to International Commercial Dispute Resolution: The China International Commercial Court

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-54
Author(s):  
Xiangzhuang Sun
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Advanced Technology ◽  
Expert Committee ◽  
Dispute Settlement Mechanism ◽  
One Stop ◽  
The One ◽  
Settlement Mechanism

Abstract This article critically reviews the establishment and operation of the China International Commercial Court (CICC) from an insider’s perspective. It offers a detailed introduction to a few of the innovative measures of the CICC, including the International Commercial Expert Committee, the ‘one-stop’ forum for a dispute settlement mechanism integrating litigation, mediation, and arbitration, more convenient litigation procedures, and the use of advanced technology in dispute resolution. More importantly, it candidly discusses the challenges facing the CICC and makes several recommendations for its improvement towards more professionalism and internationalization.

scholarly journals PEMANFAATAN MEKANISME ASEAN DALAM PENYELESAIAN MASALAH PERBATASAN THAILAND

2017 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 105-138
Author(s):  
C.P.F. Luhulima
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Dispute Settlement Mechanism ◽  
World War ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
The Icj ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The One ◽  
Preah Vihear ◽  
Settlement Mechanism

AbstractThailand’s borders with Myanmar, Laos, Cambodiaand Malaysia have been established through amapping process within the framework of theTreaty of Westfalpha. Since the England andFrance left Southeast Asia after World War II,Thailand questioned its borders with itsneighbouring countries and since then the borderissue between Thailand and her neighboursbecame the major issue. The attempts to resolvethe border conflict between Thailand andMyanmar have been conducted through“constructive engagement”, and through her policyof “changing battlefields to market places”. TheASEAN approach has been employed in her borderconflict with Cambodia. Cambodia’s attempt toinvolve the UN Security Council has been respondedby the Council to involve ASEAN in its resolution.The failure of the ASEAN approach made Cambodiato submit the issue to the ICJ in The Hague in April2011. On November 11, 2013 ICJ decided thatPreah Vihear and its surrounding area belong toCambodia. The source of the conflict with Malaysiawas not primarily about border, but it was apolitical complaint. The rebellion at the border areawill thus not terminate until the Thai authoritiesunderstand the complaints of the Muslim-Malaysat the border area. The ASEAN mechanism toresolve the inter-state conflict consists of bilateral,trilateral approaches, through the High Council andthe United Nations. The application of stepsbetween Thailand and its neighbours are thebilateral, trilateral steps and the one through theInternational Courtof Justice in The Hague.Keywords: Thailand, Myanmar, Malaysia, Kamboja,ASEAN, Dispute Settlement Mechanism AbstrakBatas Kerajaan Thailand dengan Myanmar, Laos,Kamboja dan Malaysia dibentuk melalui prosespemetaan di dalam kerangka Traktat Westfalia.Ketika Inggris dan Prancis mengundurkan dirisesudah Perang Dunia II, Thailand mempersoalkanperbatasannya dengan negara-negara tetangganya,sehingga perbatasan menjadi pokokpermasalahan. Sengketa dengan Myanmar diupayakanpenyelesainnya melalui “constructiveengagement”, dan dengan kebijakannya “changingbattlefields to market places”. Pendekatan ASEANdigunakan untuk menyelesaikan konflik denganKamboja. Pelibatan Dewan Keamanan PBB dijawabdengan meminta kedua belah pihak melibatkanASEAN. Kegagalan pendekatan ASEAN menyebabkanKamboja mengajukan kasus ini ke ICJ padaApril 2011. Pada 11 November 2013 MahkamahInternasional di Den Haag memutuskan bahwaCandi Preah Vihear dan wilayah sekitarnya adalahmilik Kamboja. Permasalahan dengan Malaysiabukanlah masalah perbatasan antara keduanegara melainkan keluhan politik, sehinggapemberontakan di perbatasan tidak akan berakhirsampai penguasa Thailand memahami keluhanorang-orang Muslim-Melayu di perbatasan.Mekanisme ASEAN untuk mengatasi sengketaantarnegara anggota terdiri dari langkah bilateral,trilateral, melalui pembentukan Dewan Tinggi danmelalui lembaga hukum PBB. Yang di-terapkandalam kasus sengketa perbatasan antara Thailanddan negara tetangganya ialah pendekatanbilateral dan trilateral serta melalui LembagaPeradilan PBB.Kata kunci: Thailand, Myanmar, Malaysia,Kamboja, ASEAN, Mekanisme PenyelesaianPerselisihan

CHINA INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL COURT (CICC): INNOVATION AND PRACTICE OF DIVERSIFIED DISPUTE RESOLUTION MECHANISM

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 230-239
Author(s):  
YUE QIANG ◽  
◽  
HAN MIN
Keyword(s):  
Information Technology ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Expert Committee ◽  
Technology Application ◽  
Brand Recognition ◽  
One Stop ◽  
The One ◽  
Dispute Resolution Mechanism ◽  
Information Technology Application

The China International Commercial Court (CICC), as a permanent adjudication organ of the Supreme People's Court of China, has built an innovative diversified dispute resolution mechanism on the existing platform. Since its establishment, CICC has been operating steadily and is poised to become a global commercial dispute resolution platform. On this ground, this article suggests that the expert committee mechanism and the information technology application of the «one-stop» platform should be further improved, and the use of diversified dispute resolution should be emphasized to promote the ultimate realization of the results of dispute resolution within the CICC, and ultimately enhancing the credibility and influence of the CICC, so as to build strong brand recognition of the CICC under the momentous changes unseen in a century.

scholarly journals The deficiency of dispute settlement mechanism seen in Chinese construction field from FIDIC

2018 ◽  
Vol 251 ◽  
pp. 05022
Author(s):  
Dezhi Li ◽  
Huiyan Zhang ◽  
Xuehua Fang
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
International Experience ◽  
Construction Work ◽  
Dispute Settlement Mechanism ◽  
Construction Disputes ◽  
Alternative Dispute Settlement ◽  
Settlement Mechanism ◽  
Laws And Regulations

Since formally introduced the friendly Amicable Settlement mechanism in 1987, FIDIC’ s efforts to promote and improve the alternative dispute settlement mechanism for construction work have been greatly developed. The current laws and regulations in China on alternative dispute resolution mechanisms for construction disputes are not perfect, and the newly revised “Conditions of contract for Construction” (GF2017-0201) lacks operability. It is of great significance to improve the dispute settlement mechanism by drawing on the provisions of article 20 of FIDIC (New Red Book), accumulate international experience and develop “One Belt And One Road”.

Rethinking the CARICOM Dispute Settlement Mechanism

2013 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-59 ◽  
Author(s):  
Namitasha Wallace Goring
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Coming Of Age ◽  
Dispute Settlement Mechanism ◽  
System A ◽  
The Caribbean ◽  
Settlement Mechanism

This article examines the progress of the CARICOM dispute settlement mechanism from its originally diplomatic procedures to its enhanced legalistic system. A standing judicial institution in CARICOM is a coming of age for this region, and its jurisprudence is now referred to as CARICOM law. These significant legal advances raise many normative questions about the adequacy of the dispute settlement institutions and whether the rules and processes are clearly defined to enable nascent CARICOM law to be the primary tool by which there can be effective regulation of CARICOM integration. In order to answer these questions, this article reviews some of the theories on dispute settlement and also draws on the experiences of similar regional bodies, and concludes that a combination of ideas and mechanisms of dispute resolution is more suited to the Caribbean situation than a uni-lineal or a transplanted regime.

scholarly journals MEDIATION IN THE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT SYSTEM UNDER THE EU- UKRAINE ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT 2014

2020 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Dispute Settlement Mechanism ◽  
Settlement System ◽  
Association Agreement ◽  
Arbitration Procedure ◽  
Dispute Settlement System ◽  
The Right ◽  
Settlement Mechanism ◽  
The Eu

The article examines the system of dispute settlement under the Association Agreement between Ukraine and the EU of 2014, which may arise from the lack of a unified approach to interpreting the provisions of the Agreement or fair use, and due to the improper performance of obligations by one of the Parties. Each individual dispute resolution mechanism is described. In particular, a general dispute settlement mechanism extending to the provisions of the Agreement on Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area between Ukraine and the EU (DCFTA), and a dispute settlement mechanism within the DCFTA, implemented through consultation, arbitration or arbitration, are explored. It is stated that the general dispute settlement mechanism is based on a "traditional" diplomatic approach, in which the Association Council, consisting of members of the Government of Ukraine and members of the European Commission, is a key dispute resolution body. The DCFTA dispute settlement mechanism is more complex. Attention is drawn to the fact that the consultation mechanism, which by its content provides for negotiation, can act as a separate dispute settlement procedure or as a stage preceding the arbitration procedure or mediation, if the parties failed to reach a mutually agreed solution. The arbitration procedure involves the consideration of the dispute by a panel of three independent arbitrators whose decisions are binding on the parties. If the respondent Party does not comply with the decision and does not offer temporary compensation, the other Party has the right to apply temporary protection measures, which stipulate the suspension of its obligations. Another mechanism for dispute resolution is mediation, which aims to facilitate a mutually agreed solution through comprehensive and expedited procedures through a mediator. The features of mediation in the dispute settlement system under this Agreement are identified. Attention is drawn to the benefits of mediation over other dispute resolution tools provided by the UA. In particular, unlike arbitration, any dispute concerning the provisions of Title IV of the AA may be the subject of mediation. In addition, the mediator does not have the right to submit a final dispute resolution to the parties compared to the arbitrators. Its purpose is to facilitate the adoption of a mutually agreed decision taken by the Parties as a result of their independent consent. Such a feature makes the mediation mechanism a more attractive and flexible way of resolving a conflict between the Parties, which is not always ready to commit itself to a legally binding solution. In addition, jointly finding a mutually beneficial solution can help solve problems in interpreting and implementing the terms of the agreement in a more effective way.

Following Suit: A Comparison of Dispute Resolution Mechanisms under NAFTA Chapter 20 and the Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement

1998 ◽  
Vol 35 ◽  
pp. 291-304
Author(s):  
Yair Baranes
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Dispute Settlement Mechanism ◽  
Settlement Mechanism

SummaryThe Free Trade Agreement between Canada and Israel bases its dispute settlement mechanism on Chapter 20 of NAFTA. There are accordingly many similarities between the two regimes. In certain areas, however, such as consultations and Panel composition, the Canada-Israel dispute settlement regime was clearly intended to differ from the NAFTA regime.

scholarly journals Research on Dispute Settlement Mechanism of Economic and Trade Cooperation Between China, Mongolia and Russia

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (5) ◽  
pp. 42
Author(s):  
Haiyan Hao
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
The Political ◽  
Mutual Benefit ◽  
Dispute Settlement Mechanism ◽  
Coordinated Development ◽  
Practical Necessity ◽  
Fair Procedure ◽  
Dispute Resolution Mechanism ◽  
Settlement Mechanism

The dispute resolution mechanism of economic and trade cooperation between China, Mongolia and Russia is a kind of dispute resolution mechanism specially used to solve the disputes of economic and trade cooperation between China, Mongolia and Russia. It is not only has the practical necessity, but also has the political and legal feasibility. The main problems of the dispute resolution mechanism are that the dispute resolution methods are too scattered, the dispute resolution basis is too old, and the cohesion and effectiveness of the dispute resolution methods are poor. Under the guidance of the concept of "coordinated development, win-win and mutual benefit, fair procedure, inclusiveness and harmony", it is reasonable to build a dispute resolution mechanism of economic and trade cooperation between China, Mongolia and Russia, which covers the way of political diplomacy and judicial characteristics. Specifically, the dispute resolution mechanism needs to establish special dispute resolution institutions, unified applicable rules, diversified dispute resolution procedures and sound supporting systems.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document