Suchergebnisse

"In 1885, Germany and Portugal became neighbours in Africa. The newly founded colony of German Southwest Africa prevented the southwards expansion of the ancient colony of Angola. The border along the Cunene and Kavango Rivers remained under dispute. After the outbreak of World War I in Europe, Portugal's neutrality was questioned in German Southwest Africa (GSWA), and when a group of German officials waiting near the border of Angola for food transports were shot in the Angolan fortress Naulila, a state of war between both colonies seemed inevitable. German troops launched several military reprisals against fortresses in southern Angola, most significantly against Naulila in December 1914. After their victory at Naulila, the Germans retreated to GSWA. However, African powers, most notably Kwanyama forces led by King Mandume, used the weakness of the defeated Portuguese army to expel the colonial troops from southern Angola. In 1915, a counter-offensive was launched with troops from Portugal that ended with the complete occupation of Kwanyama territories. After the war, a Luso-German arbitration procedure according to the Treaty of Versailles (1919) assessed the damages in Angola and Germany's responsibility to pay reparations. The arbitration award of 1928 that established Germany's responsibility for the violation of international law when attacking Naulila became a landmark case. It still holds relevance for modern international law. The final part of this book analyses the memorial culture that developed in Angola, Namibia, Germany and Portugal around the war in 1914/15"--

This research emerged from the questions about the validity of the arbitral agreements, arbitral procedures and arbitral awards, all of them developed by electronic means.In order to arise to the possible solutions of those sorts of questions, it was made, in its first stage, a complex comparative chart that shows the arbitral formal requirements established in the different legislations around the world for both international and domestic arbitrations, and their relation with the corresponding "functional-equivalent" derived from the local law on electronic commerce.That comparative chart included the legislations of Colombia, Germany, United States, Australia, Hong Kong, and United Kingdom. They were chosen in order to be able to represent the different legal systems that exist in the whole world, and also accordingly to their international political and commercial importance.Additionally, because there is no enough bibliographical material to support this subject matter, in a second part of this first stage, there were included some brief accounts of specialized journals' articles about related topics, which brought significant references to the development of the investigation. For this reason, they were graded taking into account the relevant information supplied and their relation with the analyzed problems.As a result of the first research stage, it was concluded that it is possible to develop online or electronic arbitrations in the mentioned places because their legislations allow them. However, one of the main issues that has to be faced soon is the particular cultural background of each place, because they are, in some cases, extremely different and formalist. ; Este trabajo, consistente en un estudio de derecho comparado del arbitraje en línea, se desarrolla a partir del cuestionamiento sobre la validez jurídica de los pactos, procedimientos y laudos arbitrales realizados por medios electrónicos.Con el propósito de obtener soluciones a esos interrogantes, se adelant ó, en esta primera etapa, una investigación sobre los requisitos formales exigidos en los arbitrajes tanto internacionales como locales, tal como se encuentran establecidos en diferentes jurisdicciones, así como su relaci ón con el "equivalente funcional" consignado en la correspondiente ley local sobre comercio electrónico. (El "equivalente funcional" es un criterio que intenta precisar las funciones que cumplen determinados requisitos formales [escrito, firma, original, entre otros], para establecer de qué forma pueden ser cumplidas de manera electrónica, y así otorgarle el mismo valor jurídico a tales instrumentos electrónicos.)Los resultados de esa investigación se plasmaron en un cuadro comparativo que incluyó las legislaciones de Colombia, Alemania, Estados Unidos, Australia, Hong Kong y Reino Unido. Estas jurisdicciones fueron escogidas según su importancia internacional, tanto política como comercial, y de manera tal que pudieran representar los diferentes sistemas legales que existen en el mundo.Adicionalmente, como se detectara la necesidad de respaldar la investigaci ón con material bibliográfico complementario, en la segunda parte de esta primera etapa, fueron incluidas reseñas de artículos de revistas especializadas, con referencias significativas a los subtemas objeto de investigación. Las reseñas mencionadas fueron clasificadas atendiendola relevancia de la información contenida en cada una de ellas y su relaci ón con los problemas analizados.Como resultado de la primera etapa de esta investigación profesoral, se concluyó que es posible realizar arbitrajes electrónicos o en línea en las jurisdicciones estudiadas, comoquiera que sus leyes le reconocen valor jurídico a ese tipo de actuaciones adelantadas por medios electrónicos. Sin embargo, al lado de esta conclusión jurídica se determinó que una certeza legal sobre el particular podría verse obstaculizada por una especial resistencia de carácter cultural en cada uno de los lugares estudiados (y en el resto del mundo), debido principalmente a la concepción formalista que informa las distintas áreas del derecho.Por último, como se indicara antes, es de anotar que lo descrito corresponde tan solo a la primera etapa de la investigación, desarrollada completamente en idioma inglés, la cual se extenderá en una segunda fase al estudio de la jurisprudencia que se ha emitido sobre el objeto de la investigaci ón y a un estudio preliminar de las dificultades culturales en las jurisdicciones analizadas.

AbstractOverriding mandatory laws present one of the most pervasive and delicate problems of international arbitration because they affect party autonomy in both its substantive and procedural dimensions. The tension between these concepts both in theory and in practice is a classic emanation of the public–private divide, which is particularly problematic in international and transnational settings. This tension is even stronger in the context of economic integration and regulation, such as in the EU Internal Market. This article revisits and conceptualizes the operation of overriding mandatory laws in the context of arbitration from the perspectives of conflict of laws, public law, and EU law. Drawing on the principles of effectiveness and proportionality, it proposes a practical rather than a theoretical solution to the dialectical relationship between private and public interests in legal certainty.

The traditionally emergence of differences among people, common and perhaps it was natural and it is not usually considered in relations between individuals does not seem far-fetched idea origination dispute. With the growing human population and the natural growth of business and trade transactions between them and the complexity of certain fields of these transactions disputes arising from them, more and more widespread and sometimes even has been specialized. It went to the point in one of the last two centuries, several laws passed by the government to resolve the current dispute and with forming the courts for a variety of dispute resolution between individuals, many branches of the courtsdedicated to legal and commercial affairs and handle their disputes.All countries dispute arises between individuals were appointed to the courts; although this is associated with the severity and weaknesses in different countries and legal systems. Some with creates parallel institutions for the courts try to reduce congestion in the courts claimsand others by creating a concentration of executive power in the courts were concerned their main effort in resolving disputes before the court. Except for the courts in recent centuries in most societies with little differences in the shape and nature of the investigation into the allegations were established, in the last century, another institution for dispute between individualswas createdin many countries and within their judicial system that was called judgment. This reference formed in subsets of international organizations was created to resolve international disputes that generally was concerned in the international trade disputes between natural or legal persons. This is in a series of international law, in the form of legislation and judicial procedures that in this study we analyzed it.

Upon retiring from the High Court of Australia some two years ago, I was propelled, quite willingly, into the world of international commercial arbitration and I must confess that it is a world which has changed completely from the one which I had known previously.