Party Autonomy Limited by Strong Public Policy of State of Dominant Interest

1958 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 274
Keyword(s):  
2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 101-127
Author(s):  
Bohdan Rebrysh ◽  
Natalia Maskayeva

This article puts forward that there are diverse and sound grounds preventing the universal treaty regulating comprehensively the issues of legal protection from crossborder unfair competition by substantive norms from being worked out in the near future. The development of the universal unification of the conflict-of-law rules on the law applicable to the private relations arising out of unfair competition as a possible alternative is also proposed and substantiated. The authors give some possible reasons for the absence of such a treaty and demonstrate the results that have been achieved so far in this field. The concept of the Draft of the relevant Convention is drawn up. The conclusion is made that the latter needs to be centered on the lex mercatus as a single connecting factor (due to its advantages of predictability, account of the interests of the state where the effected market is situated etc.). Furthermore, the Convention should not provide for party autonomy, should set forth the detailed rules for the legal characterization of the basic terms of the Convention, including the scope of the applicable law as well as the public policy clause and the norms on the overriding mandatory provisions.


2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 104-132
Author(s):  
Akinwumi Ogunranti

This article focuses on the arbitrability of disputes. It examines the recent global trend of delimiting the role of public policy in determining matters that should be subject to arbitration. The evaluation shows that the application of doctrines of separability and kompetenz-kompentenz plays a vital role in the delimitation process. However, notwithstanding the global trend to restrict the role of public policy in determining arbitrability, some countries in Africa still widely interpret public policy to revoke arbitral clause, stay arbitral proceedings, or refuse enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. They justify this approach on the basis that public policy is a means to protect national economic interest against foreign manipulation or exploitation. Anchored on Morgan’s theoretical approach, this article criticizes the excessive role of public policy in determining the arbitrability of disputes in Africa. It calls for a change to reflect the global trend through judicial activism and legislative reform. Although protecting national economic interest is an important goal, restricting matters that are arbitrable will not promote foreign investment. Therefore, countries in Africa must fashion arbitration practices that reflect their socio-economic background as well as contemporary arbitral trends around the world.Keywords: Arbitration; Africa; Party Autonomy; Public Policy


Author(s):  
Tsai Hua-Kai

This chapter highlights Taiwanese perspectives on the Hague Principles. The Act Governing the Choice of Law in Civil Matters Involving Foreign Elements is the primary source of choice of law rules in Taiwan’s private international law (Taiwanese PIL Act). Party autonomy is set up as a prioritized connecting factor for the choice of law rules on contracts under the Taiwanese PIL Act. Due to the fact that Taiwan is not a Member State to most of the international organizations such as the Hague Conference on Private International Law, the source of Taiwan’s private international law is mainly domestic law. Being a non-binding instrument, the Hague Principles can be taken into consideration in Taiwan as an informal source of choice of law rules on contracts. However, the Hague Principles do not provide for rules determining the applicable law in the absence of the parties’ choice. Article 20 of the Taiwanese PIL Act is, in this respect, more comprehensive. Nonetheless, the Hague Principles may be used to interpret, supplement, and further develop rules only to Article 20(1) concerning party autonomy and the limitation on that autonomy such as public policy.


2018 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 114-134
Author(s):  
Moses Oruaze Dickson

Purpose Party autonomy is a core tenet of the arbitral process which bestows certain contractual freedoms upon the disputing parties. This paper aims to utilise both doctrinal analysis and theoretical conceptualisation to examine the principle of party autonomy in international commercial arbitration. It examines the extent to which certain exceptions to this principle, such as public policy and natural justice, where autonomy impedes on matters of justice and delocalisation, have restricted the principle in practice. Design/methodology/approach Party autonomy is a core tenet of the arbitral process, which bestows certain contractual freedoms upon the disputing parties. However, in spite of its appeal as an unfettered right, it has been challenged by an array of exceptions that have rendered it largely unqualified in international commercial arbitration. This paper utilises both doctrinal analysis and theoretical conceptualisation to examine the principle of party autonomy in international commercial arbitration. It examines the extent to which certain exceptions to this principle, such as public policy and natural justice, where autonomy impedes on matters of justice and delocalisation, have restricted the principle in practice. Furthermore, approaches to party autonomy in two distinct legal systems, the Common law system in England and Sharia law in Saudi Arabia, are examined to ascertain the extent to which party autonomy has been hindered by these exceptions. Findings Arbitration continued to grow throughout the forgone centuries, with key philosophers, such as Aristotle, advocating the advantages of arbitration over litigation. In addition, the emergence of party autonomy occurred in the sixteenth century, with Dumoulin proposing that the parties’ will in contracts is sovereign. Thus, party autonomy began to develop into a significant aspect of contract law, which plays a pivotal role in arbitration. This is because the principle has its roots in the autonomous will of the parties to conduct the arbitral process as they wish. The paper explored the debate regarding party autonomy and its development into the contemporary world of arbitration. It examined its origins and how it has grown into the core fabric of arbitration today. Emphasis was provided in relation to the nature of the principle, which was highly relevant to the debate. This is because it is vital to appreciate issues such as freedom of contract to have a deeper insight into the principle and what it entails. The limitations of party autonomy were extensively examined, and the public policy exception was found to construe narrowly by a vast number of States. As a result, it was suggested that the exception should be more than merely a theoretical defence. Thus, it should be exercised where enforcement of an arbitral award would disregard unjust or improper results. Furthermore, the natural justice principle was observed as a double-edged sword that protected the parties in the arbitral process. However, it also hampered the effectiveness of party autonomy by impeding upon the parties’ freedom to contract, which ultimately limited the principle. Thus, it is concluded that the principle of party autonomy is not absolute. While it would be desirable if it was, certain issues cannot be resolved so easily. Limitations to party autonomy have existed since its inception and are most likely to continue. Although this is not the ideal situation for proponents of autonomy, it nevertheless appears to be the case. However, it is proposed that limitations to party autonomy should be chipped away as much as possible. This would enable the autonomy of the parties to be upheld at a much higher rate. Originality/value This paper utilises both doctrinal analysis and theoretical conceptualisation to examine the principle of party autonomy in international commercial arbitration. Secondary sources were also used.


Author(s):  
Kaufmann-Kohler Gabrielle ◽  
Rigozzi Antonio

Before describing the main features of an award, this chapter discusses the determination of the law governing the merits of the dispute or lex causae. It considers the role of party autonomy in this respect and examines the scope and content of the potentially applicable substantive laws that may be chosen by the parties or selected by arbitral tribunals, from national laws to transnational rules of law (the so-called lex mercatoria) over trade usages and ex aequo et bono principles. It also discusses the relevance and impact of international public policy and overriding or internationally mandatory rules. Turning to the award, the last part of the chapter sets out a typology of arbitral decisions, addresses the required form and content of awards and discusses the deliberation process as well as issues such as institutional scrutiny, dissenting opinions, and the notification, publication, and effects of the award.


Author(s):  
Schütt José Manuel Canelas

This chapter examines Bolivian perspectives on the Hague Principles. Bolivia has few legal provisions and little meaningful legal precedent referring to international commercial contracts and choice of law. Nevertheless, Bolivia’s legal system recognizes the importance of party autonomy, custom, usage, equity, and even culture in contract law. In that sense, the Hague Principles may be useful in a variety of ways, such as supplementing or re-interpreting national laws, as guidance for legal reform, or as incorporated by reference into a contract. The existing legal vacuums in Bolivian law may at times offer even broader opportunities for their use than in other jurisdictions where the law is more developed. The Hague Principles could be applied by courts and arbitral tribunals as a subsidiary source of law, either in cases where there is no specific rule applicable to the matter at hand or in cases where the Hague Principles would be helpful to interpret the applicable conflict rule. The application of the Hague Principles cannot contradict Bolivia’s mandatory rules or public policy. For an effective use of the Hague Principles, it should be noted how these are in line with constitutional principles, particularly party autonomy.


ASHA Leader ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 17 (15) ◽  
pp. 23-23
Author(s):  
George Lyons
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document