Party autonomy: promoting legal certainty and predictability in international commercial contracts through choice of law (the applicable rules of law)

In ’n regstelsel waar partye by internasionale kontrakte die outonomie gelaat word om die reg van toepassing op hulle kontrak te kies, word algemeen verwag dat die reg wat hulle kies die reg van ’n staat is. Die keuse van enige soort buitestaatlike reg as die reg van toepassing op kommersiële kontrakte word gewoonlik nie deur die howe toegelaat nie. Indien ’n bepaalde internasionale kontrak ’n arbitrasieklousule bevat, verskil die posisie. Daar is presedente wat toon dat arbitrasie-tribunale bereid is om regskeuses in internasionale kontrakte te handhaaf en toe te pas, ongeag die aard van die gekose reg, hetsy dit staatlik, of buitestaatlik is. Die vraag wat in hierdie verband ontstaan, is waarom howe arbitrasietoekennings sonder voorbehoud afdwing, selfs wanneer ’n nie-staatlike reg deur die tribunaal toegepas is om tot die beslissing te kom wat nou afgedwing moet word, maar terselfdertyd die toepassing van dieselfde buitestaatlike reg verwerp in sake wat direk voor hulle kom. In hierdie artikel argumenteer die outeur dat howe die keuse deur die partye van buitestaatlike reg behoort te aanvaar op grond van die beginsel van partyoutonomie. Die outonomiebeginsel speel ’n rol in alle kommersiële kontrakte. In die internasionale kontraktereg word partyoutonomie vandag beskou as die belangrikste verbindingsfaktor vir die vasstelling van die reg. Die erkenning van die keuse van buitestaatlike reg bied aan partye die geleentheid om toepaslike regsreëls te kies vir die hantering van spesifieke juridiese uitdagings wat verband hou met hul kontrak. Partye sal baat by die gevolglike regsekerheid en voorspelbaarheid wat die reg betref wat van toepassing is op die kontrak. Dit sal sodoende help om lang en duur geskille te voorkom wat bloot handel oor welke reg van toepassing sou wees. Die outeur bespreek welke kategorieë van buitestaatlike reg gekies behoort te kan word om internasionale kontrakte te beheers.

The Applicability of the Digital Content Directive and Sales of Goods Directive to Goods with Digital Elements

There is an ongoing trend to develop inter-connected or ‘smart’ consumer goods, which either contain digital content (such as software) or use digital services for certain of their functions (as with the navigation system of a smart car). The new Digital Content Directive and Sales of Goods Directive create a legal presumption that the seller of smart goods is contractually liable not only for the tangible item and embedded digital software but also for the inter-connected digital services. However, the article shows that much room remains for party autonomy as express agreement in a sales contract may limit the liability of the seller even for the operating system of smart goods and, thereby, override reasonable consumer expectations. The situation becomes even more complicated when the ‘digital element’ of the goods consists of free and open-source software: in these cases, the ‘separately bought’ digital content does not even fall within the scope of the Digital Content Directive, with the result that the seller is not liable for the digital content under the Sales of Goods Directive and the digital content provider is not liable for it under the Digital Content Directive. Therefore, the article argues that the new contract-law package does not raise the level of consumer protection in respect of smart goods as much as it might initially seem to.

The Cambridge Companion to International Arbitration

This Cambridge Companion explores the main senses of the term 'international arbitration'; including the arbitration of private commercial disputes, disputes between a State and a foreign investor, disputes between States and also between a State and its parts. It treats these various forms as being inter-related, if not always conceptually, then as a matter of history, rather than as collective victims of imprecise language. The book touches not only on current debates but also more foundational aspects, such as the tension between party autonomy and State authority, and the pacifist roots of modern international arbitration. Thus, it aims to offer a concise survey of the history, the main issues as well as the latest developments in a single, handy volume. It will be an invaluable introduction to the subject for students studying international arbitration, commercial law and international law, and also lawyers and the general reader.

Jonatan Echebarría Fernández. Jurisdiction and arbitration agreements in contracts for the carriage of goods by sea. Limitations on party autonomy

Este artículo reseña: Jonatan Echebarría Fernández. Jurisdiction and arbitration agreements in contracts for the carriage of goods by sea. Limitations on party autonomy. Informa Law from Routledge, Oxon 2021, 194 pp.

Right of Appeal under Section 35 of the Arbitration Act of Kenya

An arbitral award is final and binding on the parties but may be set aside for failure to adhere to due process requirements. Section 35 of the Arbitration Act (Act hereafter) provides grounds for setting aside an arbitral award. It does not state whether decisions of the High Court on setting aside an arbitral award are final and thus cannot be appealed. In Nyutu Agrovet Limited v Airtel Networks Limited, the Supreme Court interpreted Section 35 to allow appeals on High Court decisions of setting aside an arbitral award. This paper analyses the Supreme Court decision and finds that it abrogated the internationally recognised arbitration principles such as party autonomy, the finality of arbitral awards and limited court intervention. Additionally, the paper discusses the implications of the decision on arbitral practice in Kenya. Using literature review and comparative jurisprudence, it advances that Section 35 does not allow appeals on decisions of the High Court. To this end, it proposes better interpretation techniques to safeguard the sanctity of arbitral awards.

The new Uruguayan private international law: an open door to party autonomy in international contracts

On 17 November 2020, the General Law on Private International Law (Law 19.920) was approved. This Law resulted from a process of hard work that took over two decades of discussions and debates.1 With this Law, Uruguay becomes one of a group of countries that have already carried out this kind of reform, particularly in regard to international commercial law and international contracts. The new Law 19.920 allows parties to choose the applicable law (State or non-State law) to regulate their international contractual obligations. This reform has a real disruptive imprint since Uruguay leaves behind its old and anachronistic regulation of the matter. This article provides a general analysis of the regulation of international commercial law under Law 19.920 (Articles 13 and 51) and the new regime applicable to international contracts, including the parties’ right to choose the applicable law (Article 45) (State or non-State law), which increases their autonomy in comparison with the previous regime.

O caso Enka Insaat v. Insurance Company Chubb e a questão relativa à lei aplicável à cláusula arbitral: entre a lex contractus e a Lei da Sede

When negotiating a contract, parties usually establish that future and eventual disputes arising out and related to the performance of their obligations shall be resolved by arbitration. Such a choice, a clear expression of the principle of party autonomy, is embedded in a contractual clause, commonly referred to as arbitration agreement. The way by which the agreement is written and, to some extent, how it is construed can, and most commonly will, result in extensive and costly disputes. In the UK, the Supreme Court has recently decided a case related to the construction of an arbitration agreement, specifically to the law applicable to its validity, scope and effectiveness. According to the Court, in the absence of an express choice made by the parties, the system of law chosen to govern the substance of the contract will apply to the validity and scope of the agreement to arbitrate. Where no such choice is expressly or implied made by the parties, it will be the law of the seat of arbitration since it represents the system of law most closely connected to the agreement. This article reviews the case-law and provides some relevant excerpts of the case.