Bibliographie sélective OHADA

The arbitration of internal trust disputes has attracted significant attention in the arbitration and trust law communities in recent years with draft clauses and rules produced by arbitral institutions, several states undertaking legislative reform in order to provide such arbitrations with a statutory basis and numerous scholars as well as practitioners writing articles on the subject. Such enthusiasm is justified on the basis that arbitration has several advantages over litigation, such as confidentiality, international enforceability of judgments, the ability to choose one’s judge and the power to tailor the procedure. Notwithstanding these advantages, trust arbitration has failed to make any great inroad into trust disputes due to the many novel and complex points of legal practice and theory which it entails. For example, although arbitration does not typically involve minors or legally incapable parties’ trusts do, and thus trust arbitration raises numerous due process and human rights concerns. Similarly, court supervision and enforcement of trusts is sometimes considered essential to the very nature of trusts and questions therefore arise concerning the extent to which arbitral tribunals could supplant courts in that regard. Another complication is that trusts are not contracts and questions therefore arise about how to bind individuals to a trust arbitration agreement, particularly as regards beneficiaries who may be unascertained, minor or legally incompetent at the time the trust was created. The aim of this thesis is to analyse and present potential solutions to these complications from an English law perspective, although other common law legal systems will be analysed where relevant

Identifier: https://escholarship.mcgill.ca/concern/theses/x346d9718