11 Other Forms of Arbitration and the Future of Arbitration in Korea

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kim Joongi
Keyword(s):  
South Korea ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
The South ◽  
Commercial Arbitration ◽  
Resolution Process ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Dispute Resolution Process ◽  
The Future ◽  
North And South ◽  
Investment Treaty Arbitration

This chapter looks at other forms of arbitration and reflects on the future of arbitration in Korea. In addition to commercial arbitration, other forms of arbitration, particularly investment treaty arbitration, are becoming increasingly important for Korean parties, practitioners, and researchers. Recent efforts to establish a dispute-resolution process through a similar framework between North and South Korea are also discussed. The chapter shows the joint contributions of both sides toward the South–North arbitration efforts. Finally, the chapter notes that while in many regards the future of arbitration in Korea looks bright, despite this outlook, there are still challenges yet to overcome.

Investment Treaty Claims and Post-Conflict Justice

2019 ◽  
pp. 195-224
Author(s):  
Jure Zrilič
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Optimal Structure ◽  
State Control ◽  
Resolution Process ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Post Conflict ◽  
Dispute Resolution Process ◽  
Investment Treaties ◽  
Conflict Period

This chapter focuses on the post-conflict period and critically assesses how investment treaty claims can interfere with the transition to peace. It questions the role of investment treaties as a facilitator of peace as well as the position that investor−state arbitration is an optimal structure for remedying conflict-related losses. Based on the assumption that large compensation awards may adversely affect the host state’s post-conflict transition, it examines different methods for adjusting post-conflict compensation modalities in light of the transitional circumstances. It further compares investor−state arbitration to other regimes for remedying conflict-related losses, and argues that in some cases, the re-emergence of state control in a dispute resolution process could be justified.

scholarly journals Mekanisme Majelis Tahkim Dalam Penyelesaian Sengketa Rumah Tangga (Analisis Enakmen Undang-Undang Keluarga Islam Nomor 2 Tahun 2003 Seksyen 48 tentang Penambahan Kaedah-Kaedah Hakam di Mahkamah Rendah Syariah Shah Alam, Selangor, Malaysia)

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 75
Author(s):  
Muslem Muslem ◽  
Siti Aminah Binti Abd Samat
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Family Law ◽  
Assembly Process ◽  
Knowing How ◽  
Resolution Process ◽  
Dispute Resolution Process ◽  
Islamic Family Law ◽  
Descriptive Method ◽  
Husband And Wife

Majelis Tahkim sebagai proses penyelesaian sengketa (syiqāq) yang melibatkan pertemuan suami dan isteri bersama dengan Hakam untuk tujuan perdamaian atau perceraian dengan lafaz talak atau dengan khuluk. Berdasarkan fakta empiris menyatakan bahwa salah satu provinsi yang paling menonjol menggunakan metode Majelis Tahkim ini adalah Provinsi Selangor. Sebagaimana yang diketahui oleh penulis bahwa praktek Majelis Tahkim di Mahkamah Rendah Syariah Shah Alam menggunakan Kaedah-Kaedah Hakam yang diterapkan khusus di Provinsi Selangor sahaja yang berbeda dengan provinsi yang lain di Malaysia. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mendapatkan gambaran bagaimana praktek Enakmen Undang-Undang Keluarga Islam Nomor 2 Tahun 2003 Seksyen 48 mengenai penambahan Kaedah-Kaedah Hakam (Negeri Selangor) terhadap pelaksanaan Majelis Tahkim dalam penyelesaian sengketa rumah tangga (syiqāq) di Mahkamah Rendah Syariah Shah Alam. Penulisan skripsi ini adalah bertujuan untuk mengetahui bagaimana mekanisme Majelis Tahkim dalam penyelesaian sengketa rumah tangga dan keunggulan Kaedah-Kaedah Hakam yang digunakan. Oleh itu, penulisan ini menggunakan metode deskriptif analisis. Dari hasil penelitian penulis dapat disimpulkan bahwa mekanisme Majelis Tahkim dalam penyelesaian sengketa rumah tangga di Mahkamah Rendah Syariah Shah Alam menggunakan Kaedah-Kaedah Hakam terdapat beberapa keunggulan antaranya menjelaskan tentang Hakam dan proses Majelis Tahkim secara rinci sebagai panduan Hakam. Seterusnya, proses Majelis Tahkim ini mampu mengurangi beban Mahkamah Syariah dalam menyelesaikan kasus yang banyak di meja Mahkamah. Oleh hal yang demikian, diharapkan bagi pihak kerajaan perundangan untuk memberlakukan Kaedah-Kaedah Hakam ini bagi semua provinsi di Malaysia agar Hakam mendapatkan panduan lebih mendalam terkait Hakam dan proses Majelis Tahkim. Tahkim Assembly as a dispute resolution process (SYIQĀQ) involving a husband and wife meeting along with Hakam for peace or divorce with the pronunciation of Talak or with Khuluk. According to empirical facts, it states that one of the most prominent provinces using the method of the Tahkim assembly is Selangor province. As it is known by the authors that the practice of the Tahkim assembly in Shah Alam Sharia court used the essential methods applied in the province of Selangor only different from other provinces in Malaysia. This study aims to obtain an overview of the enactment of Islamic Family Law number 2 the year 2003 section 48 on the addition of the Hakam methods (Selangor State) on the implementation of the Tahkim assembly in the settlement of household disputes (SYIQĀQ) in the Syariah low court of Shah Alam. The writing of this thesis is aimed at knowing how the Tahkim assembly mechanisms in the settlement of household disputes and the excellence of the Hakam methods used. Thus, this writer uses a descriptive method of analysis. From the results of the author's research can be concluded that the mechanism of the Tahkim assembly in the settlement of household disputes in Shah Alam Syariah low court using the essential methods there are several advantages between explaining Hakam and the process of Tahkim assembly in detail as a guide to Hakam. Subsequently, the Tahkim assembly process was able to reduce the burden of sharia Court in resolving many cases at the Court table. Therefore, it is expected for the legal government to enforce this Hakam method for all provinces in Malaysia for Hakam to obtain a more in-depth guide to the Hakam and the process of the Tahkim assembly.

Adamakopoulos and Others v. Cyprus: “Massive” Problems Concerning a Mass Claims Proceeding in Investment Treaty Arbitration?

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Keer HUANG
Keyword(s):  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Majority Decision ◽  
The Future ◽  
Investment Treaty Arbitration

Abstract The Adamakopoulos and Others v. Cyprus Decision is noteworthy because it provides a blueprint for mass claims proceedings in investment treaty arbitration, justifying the possibility of addressing investment claims en masse in the future. This case comment reviews the background to the dispute, addresses the majority decision on the mass claims, and comments on the Tribunal's reasoning regarding the non-requirement of additional consent to mass claims arbitration, the homogeneity of the claims, and procedural flexibility.

Crafting the International Economic Order: The Public Function of Investment Treaty Arbitration and Its Significance for the Role of the Arbitrator

2010 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 401-430 ◽  
Author(s):  
STEPHAN W. SCHILL
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
International Economic Order ◽  
International Standards ◽  
Dispute Settlement Mechanism ◽  
Commercial Arbitration ◽  
Party Autonomy ◽  
The Public ◽  
Investment Protection ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Investment Treaty Arbitration

AbstractInvestment treaty arbitration, unlike commercial arbitration, is not a purely private dispute settlement mechanism that is entirely subject to party autonomy and limited in its effects to the parties to the proceedings. Rather, it fulfils a public function in influencing the behaviour of foreign investors, states, and civil society more generally by crafting and concretizing international standards of investment protection. Investment treaty arbitration thus implements and operates as part of a public system of investment protection. Arbitrators, as a result, incur obligations not only towards the parties to the proceedings, but vis-à-vis the whole system of investment protection. These obligations can be conceptualized as part of the public law implications of investment treaty arbitration and affect, inter alia, the role and status of arbitrators in investment treaty disputes, the procedural maxims that such arbitrations should follow, and the way arbitral awards should be crafted.

Part IV Guide to Key Substantive Issues, 19 The Law Applicable in Investment Treaty Arbitration

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Banifatemi Yas
Keyword(s):  
Specific Nature ◽  
Commercial Arbitration ◽  
Party Autonomy ◽  
Applicable Law ◽  
Investment Protection ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Primary Rule ◽  
The Law ◽  
Investment Treaty Arbitration

Investment treaty arbitration, being an arbitral process, in no way differs from international commercial arbitration in that the principle of party autonomy is the primary rule governing the arbitration, including as regards the law applicable to the substance of the dispute. When the applicable law has been chosen by the parties, the arbitrators have a duty to apply such law and nothing but such law. It is only in the absence of a choice by the parties that the arbitrators are entitled to exercise a degree of discretion in the determination of the applicable law. This chapter examines each of these situations in turn, before considering whether the specific nature of investment protection treaties has implications in terms of choice of law process.

BG Group Plc v. Republic of Argentina (Sup. Ct. U.S.)

2015 ◽  
Vol 54 (1) ◽  
pp. 130-151
Author(s):  
Christina Trahanas
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
The United States ◽  
Commercial Arbitration ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
First Time ◽  
Investment Treaty Arbitration

On March 5, 2014, the Supreme Court of the United States (the Court or Supreme Court) rendered its decision in BG Group PLC v. Republic of Argentina (BG Group). Applying principles from judicial review of commercial arbitration awards to the investment treaty context, the Court overturned a decision of the United States Court of Appeals that vacated an investment treaty arbitral award. BG Group is significant because it is the first time that the Supreme Court has reviewed an investment treaty arbitration.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document