Bibliographie sélective OHADA

The frequency of dissenting opinions accompanying arbitration awards in international arbitration has multiplied, particularly in international investment arbitration. Accordingly, dissenting opinions are now inevitable companions to majority awards. Notwithstanding the fact that dissenting opinions neither form part of an arbitral award nor constitute a separate award, the escalation of dissenting opinions spawns anxiety in scholars and practitioners. This trepidation ignited a crusade whereby those opposed to the practice of rendering dissent challenge the role and usefulness of these opinions. In this respect, this Article initially considers and critiques specific arguments raised by those opposed to dissenting opinions in international arbitration. Following analysis of the criticisms, this Article explores the beneficial and constructive aspects of dissenting opinions. Evident from this discussion is that dissenting opinions are not only integral to supplement an arbitrator’s quasi-judicial capacity, but also encourage issuance of well-reasoned awards. Clear from the benefits of dissenting opinions in international arbitration, any departure from the present clemency espoused toward the practice will eventuate in the field’s regression.