Part 2 National and Regional Reports, Part 2.2 Asia: Coordinated by Yuko Nishitani and Béligh Elbalti, 35 Singapore: Singaporean Perspectives on the Hague Principles

Author(s):  
Yeo Tiong Min

This chapter describes Singaporean perspectives on the Hague Principles. Party autonomy is recognized as a very important principle in the private international law of Singapore. The primacy given to the role of party autonomy is evidenced by the adoption of the New York Convention and UNCITRAL Model Law for international arbitration, the adoption of the Convention on Choice of Court Agreements for international litigation, and the palpable support of the UNCITRAL Convention on International Settlement Agreements Resulting from Mediation. Most of private international law in Singapore is sourced in judge-made law. In the absence of direct Singapore authority, Singapore courts have traditionally looked to English case law for guidance, but increasingly, the courts have looked to the laws of other jurisdictions, and indeed international instruments which do not have binding force in Singapore law. Given the level of sophistication of existing common law contract choice of law rules, it is unlikely that Singapore will engage in radical law reform. However, it is likely that the Singapore courts will continue to look to the Hague Principles for guidance in areas where the common law is unclear or where there is a gap or strong imperative for change.

1997 ◽  
Vol 46 (2) ◽  
pp. 274-308 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Hill

As a method for resolving commercial disputes which have connections with two or more countries, arbitration has been given a tremendous boost this century by two developments at the international level. The New York Convention of 1958—which was first implemented in England and Wales by the Arbitration Act 1975—introduced a regime which went a long way toward ensuring that arbitration agreements are respected and that arbitral awards are easily enforceable. The Convention has been hugely successful in that it has been ratified by upwards of 90 States, including all the countries of Western Europe (with the exception of Iceland) and nearly all countries which are significant commercial centres. More indirect has been the influence of the Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration, which was adopted by UNCITRAL in 1985. Although the Model Law, which seeks to encourage States to modernise their arbitration laws, has not been enacted by a very large number of countries, it has had a significant impact in that it has set an agenda for reform—even for those countries which have decided not to enact it. The Model Law has become “a yardstick by which to judge the quality of… existing arbitration legislation and to improve it”.


Author(s):  
Hook Maria

This chapter examines the choice of law rules that determine the law applicable to international contracts in New Zealand, comparing them to the Hague Principles. Private international law in New Zealand is still largely a common law subject, and the choice of law rules on international commercial contracts are no exception. The general position, which has been inherited from English common law, is that parties may choose the law applicable to their contract, and that the law with the closest and most real connection applies in the absence of choice. There are currently no plans in New Zealand for legislative reform, so the task of interpreting and developing the choice of law rules continues to fall to the courts. When performing this task, New Zealand courts have traditionally turned to English case law for assistance. But they may be willing, in future, to widen their scope of inquiry, given that the English rules have long since been Europeanized. It is conceivable, in this context, that the Hague Principles may be treated as a source of persuasive authority, provided they are consistent with the general principles or policies underlying the New Zealand rules.


Author(s):  
Gebremeskel Fekadu Petros

This chapter reflects on Ethiopian perspectives on the Hague Principles. Ethiopia does not have a codified law regulating matters of private international law, nor is there detailed case law from which one could derive key principles of the subject. While the shortage of private international law in Ethiopia is evident, the problem is most severe in the area of applicable law. In relation to party autonomy in choice of law, the Federal Supreme Court’s Cassation Division has handed down some interesting decisions, and these indeed have the force of law in Ethiopia. Nevertheless, the approach of the Ethiopian courts in respect of party autonomy is not very developed and clear, including in the field of international commercial contracts. While it would be prudent for Ethiopian courts to refer to the Hague Principles as persuasive authority, this requires awareness of the existence of the Hague Principles. In the long term, the Hague Principles will surely find their way into Ethiopian law.


Author(s):  
Gama Lauro ◽  
Tiburcio Carmen ◽  
Albuquerque Felipe

This chapter evaluates Brazilian perspectives on the Hague Principles. Despite the proposition of several bills in the 1960s, no legislative initiative to modernize the Brazilian private international law has succeeded so far. The most recent legislative proposals have focused on modifying Article 9 of the Law of Introduction to the Norms of Brazilian Law (LINDB) rather than the whole system. One of these proposals, pending before the Senate, amends the Brazilian Code of Consumer Protection and updates and expands the contents of Article 9 LINDB. This bill incorporates several provisions of the Hague Principles; it states the basic principle of party autonomy and authorizes choice of law in respect of international contracts (B2B transactions). As Brazil still waits for law reform, the Hague Principles may be relevant as persuasive authority before the Brazilian courts. In this sense, the Hague Principles may be used in the interpretation, supplementation, and development of the applicable rules and principles of Brazilian private international law.


2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 195-205 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eunice CHUA

AbstractOn 26 June 2018, the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law [UNCITRAL] approved, largely without modification, the final drafts of the Convention on International Settlement Agreements Resulting from Mediation (the Singapore Convention) and amendments to the Model Law on International Commercial Mediation prepared by Working Group II. These instruments aim to promote the enforceability of international commercial settlement agreements reached through mediation in the same way that the New York Convention facilitates the recognition and enforcement of international arbitration awards. This paper provides a critical analysis of the Singapore Convention, and some commentary from an Asian perspective.


Author(s):  
Reyes Anselmo

This chapter explores Hong Kong perspectives on the Hague Principles. Hong Kong has no enacted code of private international law rules. In relation to contracts dealing with commercial matters, the choice of law principles of Hong Kong law are largely to be found at common law. Decisions of the English court, in particular, are often cited in Hong Kong as exemplifying the law on a given question. To a lesser degree, principles may be found in statute. While Hong Kong judges must look to case law to discern relevant choice of law principles, nothing prevents them from also having regard to the Hague Principles and holding that one or more articles therein accurately reflect Hong Kong law. Indeed, articles of the Hague Principles can be referred to by Hong Kong judges as accurate statements of present day Hong Kong law, as foundations for the refinement of existing common law rules, or as indications of how Hong Kong choice of law principles may be extended to deal with novel situations.


Author(s):  
Oppong Richard Frimpong

This chapter studies the common law African countries Gambia, Ghana, Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Tanzania, Uganda, and Zambia. Their main source of private international law rules is judicial decisions or case law. Because of the relatively underdeveloped nature of their private international law regimes, foreign case law often serves as an important source of persuasive authority. In this regard, the jurisprudence of the English courts is particularly persuasive and is often referred to by the courts. In general, an international convention or treaty does not have the force of law in the legal systems of the countries under study, unless it is expressly incorporated into national law. In essence, they are dualist countries. However, courts in some of the countries under study have demonstrated a willingness to seek guidance from international treaties that are not yet domestically in force, if the circumstances are appropriate. Thus, it is possible, that courts in the countries under study may be receptive to the Hague Principles, especially if argued by counsel.


Author(s):  
Cordero-Moss Giuditta

This chapter assesses Norwegian perspectives on the Hague Principles. To understand the significance in Norway of the Hague Principles, it is necessary to explain the Norwegian system of private international law and its sources. Historically, conflict rules in Norway were not codified. Nowadays, private international law, at least as far as civil obligations are concerned, is undergoing a process of codification. A proposal for a statute on the law applicable to obligations has been released for public consultation, which has been concluded, and the Ministry is expected to draft a Proposition on that basis. The proposal is largely based on the EU regulations Rome I and Rome II. The Norwegian system of private international law may therefore be said to have turned into a system that is de facto parallel to EU Private International Law. Should the proposed statute be enacted, the system will also formally, albeit unilaterally, be parallel to Rome I and Rome II. Generally, therefore, it can be assumed that conflict rules will coincide with the rules contained in Rome I. In such a picture, the role that the Hague Principles may play for the Norwegian regime of party autonomy is quite restricted, as Norwegian courts generally use sources of soft law as a corroboration of Norwegian law, but not as a correction.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document