Suchergebnisse

On July 2, 1986, the Dutch Parliament adopted a statute modernizing Dutch law on arbitration. Although it does not technically distinguish between domestic and international arbitration, this statute, following the trend initiated by the United Kingdom [1979 Arbitration Act, 18 I.L.M. 1249 (1979)], France [Decree of May 12, 1981, 20 I.L.M. 917 (1981)], and Belgium [March 27, 1985 Statute, 25 I.L.M. 725 (1986)], clearly purports to liberalize Dutch law on international arbitration. The travaux preparatoires states that it does not substantially depart from the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration [24 I.L.M. 1302 (1985)]. The statute came into force on December 1, 1986, and applies to pending arbitration cases.

Intro -- Preface -- Contents -- Abbreviations -- Chapter 1: Investment Dispute Settlement and the Position of State-to-State Arbitration in Investment Law -- 1.1 Background to the Study -- 1.2 Scope of the Study -- 1.3 Dispute Settlement Through Arbitration in International Investment Agreements -- 1.3.1 Origins of Investment Protection -- 1.3.1.1 Investment Protection: Parties to the Debate -- 1.3.1.2 The IIAs as the Backbone of the Current Investment Protection Framework -- 1.3.2 Dispute Settlement Through Arbitration -- 1.3.2.1 History of Arbitration in International Dispute Settlement Among States -- 1.3.2.2 History of Arbitration in IIAs -- 1.3.2.3 Recent Developments on the Adoption and Signing of IIAs -- 1.4 State-to-State Arbitration as a Means of Dispute Settlement Under IIAs -- 1.4.1 Origins of State-to-State Arbitration in IIAs -- 1.4.2 State-to-State Arbitration Provisions in Major Model BITs -- 1.4.3 State-to-State Arbitration Under Trade and Investment Agreements -- 1.4.4 State-to-State Arbitration in Energy Charter Treaty -- 1.5 Interim Conclusions -- Chapter 2: Framework for State-to-State Arbitration Under the Compromissory Clause in an IIA -- 2.1 Understanding the Scope of the Powers from the Text of the Treaty -- 2.1.1 The Requirement of the Existence of a Dispute Between the Parties -- 2.1.2 Coverage: `Interpretation or Application of This Treaty´ -- 2.2 The Functioning of the State-to-State Arbitration Process -- 2.2.1 Arbitrability as a Key Feature for Arbitration -- 2.2.2 Principles Related to Jurisdiction of an Arbitral Tribunal -- 2.2.2.1 Separability of the Arbitration Clause -- 2.2.2.2 Competence-Competence Principle -- 2.2.2.3 Challenges to the Jurisdiction of the Tribunal -- 2.2.3 Mutual Consent of State Parties for Arbitration -- 2.2.4 Admissibility as a Key Issue for State-to-State Arbitration.

Im Fokus der Arbeit steht das Rechtsinstitut des vorläufigen Rechtsschutzes im internationalen Investitionsschutzrecht. Art. 47 der ICSID-Konvention (ICSID) wird anhand der bisherigen Rechtssprechungspraxis der ICSID-Schiedsgerichte eingehend untersucht und in den größeren Kontext zu vorläufigen Maßnahmen nach Art. 41 des IGH-Statuts und Art. 26 der UNCITRAL-Regeln gestellt. Vor dem Hintergrund immer noch bestehender Unsicherheiten über die Auslegung des Art. 47 ICSID macht sich die Arbeit zum Ziel, für den Rechtsanwender klare Leitlinien zu schaffen, wie ein Antrag auf Anordnung vorläufiger Maßnahmen gestellt werden muss, um erfolgreich zu sein. Nachdem die Voraussetzungen der Norm anhand von Fallbeispielen konkretisiert werden, werden die Fragen der Bindungswirkung sowie der Anerkennungs- und Durchsetzungsfähigkeit von Anordnungen nach Art. 47 ICSID geklärt. Ein weiterer Schwerpunkt der Arbeit ist die Analyse des Rechtsinstituts des Notfallschiedsrichters (sog. emergency arbitrator). The dissertation focuses on interim measures protection in international investment arbitration. It analyzes the case law on Art. 47 of the ICSID Convention (ICSID) and puts the provision into the broader context of interim measures protection under Art. 41 of the ICJ Statute and Art. 26 of the UNCITRAL Rules. In light of the still exisiting uncertainties regarding the interpretation and application of Art. 47 ICSID, the dissertation aims at defining clear guidelines on how to couch a successful request for the issuance of provisional measures by defining the prerequisits of and legal consequences resulting from Art. 47 ICSID. Further, the dissertation deals with topical questions regarding the bindingness as well as the recognition and enforcement of provisional measures orders. Finally, the emergency arbitrator - a prominentfeature recently introduced in

"This book carries out an analysis of the Mara Luz incident, a significant episode in Japanese and world history, from a legal perspective. In July 1872, the Mara Luz, a barque flying the Peruvian flag, carried Chinese indentured servants from Macau to Peru. After the ship stopped for repairs in Kanagawa Bay, a number of legal issues arose that were destined to change the perception and use of the law in Japan forever. The case had a tremendous impact on the collective imagination, both Japanese and international: it is one of the first occurrences in which an Asian country decided to resist the pressure of a Western nation, and responded using the most refined tools of domestic and international law. Moreover, the final outcome of the case (arbitration in front of the Czar of Russia) marks the debut of Japan on the stage of international arbitration. While historians have written widely on the subject, the legal importance of this event has been relatively neglected. This book uses the case to explore the technical legal issues Japan was facing in its transition from pre-modernity to modernity. These include unequal treaties, extraterritoriality clauses, the need to establish an updated judicial system, and a delicate balance between asserting sovereignty and resorting to diplomacy in solving disputes involving foreigners"--Publisher's description.