Bibliographie sélective OHADA

This dissertation uses Python-based programming to retrieve and analyze a sample of approximately 400,000 material contracts that companies filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission between 2001 and 2013, focusing on the dispute resolution mechanisms specified therein. The first chapter considers the effectiveness of two state-level efforts to attract dispute resolution business, examining how specialized “business courts” and the Revised Uniform Arbitration Act affected arbitration and choice-of-forum clause use in these material contracts. The second chapter examines whether and how companies and executives “customized” their arbitration clauses in response to Internal Revenue Code Section 409A, which increased both the likelihood and the complexity of potential disputes between these parties. The third chapter considers how companies and executives responded when the Supreme Court overturned the Ninth Circuit’s anomalous refusal to enforce employment-related arbitration clauses. Each chapter finds that contracting parties adjusted their dispute resolution provisions in response to the policy change(s) at issue – suggesting that for the sophisticated parties in my dataset, these provisions receive careful thought and are not mere “boilerplate.”

The Fair and Equitable Treatment (FET) standard is the most important and, because of its flexible nature and its status as a ‘catch-all’ provision, most controversial investment protection standard in international investment treaties. The standard imposes the most far-reaching obligation of any aspect of such treaties. This thesis’ core contention is that the current investment tribunals’ interpretation of the FET standard prioritises the interests of foreign investors and neglects the perspectives of host developing countries. Therefore there is a pressing need to reconceptualise the interpretation of the FET standard. In service to depicting the perspectives of host developing countries, this thesis advances an understanding of classifications such as ‘developing’ and ‘developed’ that reflects the issues and challenges that these countries face in the investment dispute context, such as their lack of resources, administrative capacity, technology, and infrastructure, as much as the economic and social level of development international organisations generally emphasise in their classifications. It addresses socio-political circumstances such as political instability, social unrest, conflict and its aftermath, social and political transition, and economic crises and their impact on host developing countries in the investment dispute context. Through a detailed study of the approaches they have taken to such issues in their interpretation of the breach of FET standard in disputes involving host developing countries, it shows that current investment tribunals have taken inconsistent and inadequate approaches to the issues host developing countries face. It argues that a reconceptualised interpretation of the FET standard which acknowledges the developmental issues and challenges this thesis has identified would accommodate the needs of the host developing countries while continuing to give reasonable protections to foreign investors and therefore serve the needs of the system as a whole.

A tese discute o problema dos terceiros na arbitragem. Ela distingue os planos substantivo (contratual) e processual (jurisdicional) da arbitragem e, portanto, o status de parte e terceiro com relação, respectivamente, à convenção de arbitragem e ao processo arbitral. Depois de desenvolver as premissas teóricas na Parte 1, a Parte 2 expõe as teorias contratuais e societárias por meio das quais um não-signatário pode ficar vinculado à convenção de arbitragem, com destaque para a extensão a todos os acionistas da companhia da cláusula compromissória estatutária, bem como para a aplicação do princípio da boa-fé objetiva (teoria dos atos próprios, estoppel) para impedir com que determinados signatários burlem a convenção de arbitragem ao incluir terceiros no polo passivo da demanda ou, ainda, para impor a arbitragem a não-signatários que derivaram um benefício do contrato inter alios. Na Parte III, a atenção volta-se para o processo e a sentença arbitral. Expõe-se uma teoria dos efeitos da sentença, buscando-se explicar a sua potencial eficácia ultra partes com base: a) na necessidade de realizar o direito da contraparte à tutela jurisdicional (adquirente do direito litigioso, sucessores post rem judicatam); e b) na identificação de nexos de prejudicialidade-dependência permanente entre as relações jurídicas no plano do direito material (terceiro titular de situação dependente). Refutam-se, em passo seguinte, teorias que preconizam o valor absoluto da sentença. Oferece-se, como núcleo da tese, uma reconstrução dogmática das modalidades de intervenção de terceiro, buscando adaptá-las à arbitragem para alcançar, em cada situação, um justo equilíbrio entre as expectativas contratuais das partes originárias e a natureza privada da arbitragem, de um lado, e os efeitos da sentença perante terceiros, de outro. Conclui-se que, em alguns casos, legitima-se o terceiro a intervir voluntariamente, mesmo contra ou independentemente da vontade das partes, se ele estiver sujeito aos efeitos da sentença. Em hipótese excepcionalíssimas, ademais, a parte pode sujeitar um terceiro aos efeitos de intervenção, provocando a sua assistência no processo arbitral. The thesis addresses the problems of third parties in arbitration. It distinguishes the substantive (contractual) and procedural dimensions of arbitration and, hence, the status of parties and third parties in connection with, respectively, the arbitration agreement and the arbitral proceedings. After spelling out theoretical premises in Part 1, Part 2 covers the contractual and corporate theories by which a non-signatory may be bound by the arbitration agreement, highlighting the extension to all shareholders of the agreement in the corporate bylaws, as well as the application of the equitable doctrine of estoppel to bar certain signatories from avoiding the arbitration agreement by including third parties as defendants or even to impose arbitration onto non-signatories who derived a benefit from the contract inter alios. In Part III, my attention turns to the proceedings and the arbitral award. I set out a doctrine of the effects of judgments, seeking to explain their potential effects on third parties based: a) on the prevailing need to preserve the counterpartys right to a binding declaration on its asserted claims (acquirers, successors post rem judicatam); b) the identification of substantive ties between legal relationships that make the third parties rights permanently dependent on the situation between the parties. I then refute theories ascribing absolute value to the award vis-à-vis third parties. As the core of the thesis, I offer a doctrinal reconstruction of third party interventions, seeking to adapt them to arbitration in order to achieve, in each situation, a fair balance between the contractual expectations of the original parties and the private nature of arbitration, in one hand, and the effects of the award on third parties, on the other. I conclude that a third party should be allowed to intervene, albeit against the will of the parties, if it is subject to the concrete effects of the arbitral award. In exceptional situations, moreover, a party may vouch in a third party, who will then be bound by the determinations of factual and legal issues made in the award.

This thesis aims to provide an analytical framework to which investor-State arbitral tribunals can refer in cases where international trade law is invoked. The starting point of the present study is the trend in commentary on international trade and investment law, which makes the argument that international trade and investment law should be reconciled due to the clear "convergence" between (some of) their constitutive elements. This convergence argument is not misguided: there are similarities between the underlying principles of global trade and investment and, as such, a better coordination of these principles would be helpful for several reasons. Such reasons include legal certainty, reduction of transaction costs, better coherence in the operation of international agreements that now combine both trade and investment provisions, to name a few. However, no matter how reconcilable or converging the two disciplines may be, their enforcement mechanisms are structurally different and are likely to remain so even if the reforms towards a modernization of the investment dispute settlement (currently discussed at the EU policy level) are eventually implemented in the near future. In light of this last point, it is possible to claim that integration between trade law and investment law will only have limited or even negative effects if the trade and investment adjudicators continue to exercise their functions in an isolated manner, without taking cognizance of (i) the norms contained in the other discipline and (ii) the other adjudicator's scope of authority. Effective convergence of trade and investment entails a two-way process pursuant to which one adjudicator can use (i.e. take into account, refer to, apply, interpret and enforce) the law of the other and vice-versa. The thesis envisages one of the two dimensions of this process, namely the use of trade law by the investment adjudicator. Looking into the details of the convergence argument, the role of investment dispute settlement mechanism and the use of trade norms over the past two decades by litigants and arbitrators, the present study identifies both the legal techniques and obstacles these actors shall apply or go beyond in order to use trade norms in the most appropriate way and, more importantly, benefit from this use.

Milletlerarası ticarî sözleşmelerden kaynaklanan uyuşmazlıklar söz konusu olduğunda akla ilk gelen çözüm yöntemi tahkimdir. Zira milletlerarası ticarî tahkimin devlet yargılamasına göre önemli avantajları bulunmakta, hakemlerin bağımsızlığı ve tarafsızlığı ise bu avantajların en önemlilerinden biri olarak karşımıza çıkmaktadır. Bu çerçevede, tahkim süreci başlarken hakemlerin bağımsız ve tarafsız olmaları ile süreç tamamlanana kadar bu şekilde kalmaları gerektiği hususu milletlerarası ticarî tahkimin en temel ilkesi olarak genel kabul görmüş; millî kanunlarda, milletlerarası metinlerde ve milletlerarası tahkim kurumlarının düzenlemelerinde doğrudan ya da dolaylı bir şekilde yerini almıştır. Bu çalışmada da bağımsızlık ve tarafsızlık kavramlarından ne anlaşılması gerektiği, bu kavramların uygulamada nasıl yorumlandığı, tahkim yargılamasındaki önemi ve nasıl korunduğu, yukarıda bahsedilen düzenlemeler ile millî mahkemeler ve milletlerarası tahkim kurumlarının kararları ışığında incelenmiştir. When disputes emerging from international commercial contracts are in question, arbitration is the first resolution method that comes to mind. This is because international commercial arbitration has significant advantages compared to the state jurisdiction where impartiality and independence of arbitrators is considered to be one of the most important ones of those advantages. In this framework, the necessity that arbitrators ought to be impartial and independent from the very start till the end of the arbitration process has gained general acceptance as the basic principle of international commercial arbitration and directly or indirectly has taken its place in national laws, international texts and regulations of international arbitration institutions. In this study, the meaning of independence and impartiality, how they are interpreted in practice, the importance of these concepts in international commercial arbitration and how they are protected are examined in the framework of above mentioned regulations and decisions of national courts and international arbitration institutions.

This paper explores the feasibility of commercial arbitration as a means to foster the process of Eastern Africa integration. The author proffers an argument in the context of Eastern Africa integration, that commercial arbitration offers a better platform for dealing with commercial disputes that are bound to arise considering the differing personal or state interests in the ongoing Eastern Africa integration, as compared to national Courts. This discourse is premised on the fact that the five member countries making up the East African Community (EAC) have different legal systems and this presents a major challenge in harmonising the various legal systems. This also affects the possible use of courts in managing the potential transnational commercial disputes due to the potentially different rules of procedure and practice. The paper briefly examines the state of commercial arbitration in the EAC Member States with a view to identifying the existing frameworks and any impediments in their effectiveness. Finally, the author makes a case for utilizing commercial arbitration to build bridges and foster Eastern Africa integration for development.

Après plus de deux décennies d'expérimentation, le moment est venu pour l'Organisation pour l'Harmonisation en Afrique du droit des Affaires ou OHADA de marquer une pause et de récapituler l'application de ses valeurs normatives aux différents domaines relevant du champ matériel d'application du Traité ayant fondé l'organisation. L'intérêt et l'utilité d'un tel bilan passent, entre autres, par la relecture de sa norme juridique sur l'arbitrage ad hoc qu'est l'Acte Uniforme OHADA relatif à l'Arbitrage (AUA). Ce bilan doit pouvoir se faire non pas au regard de ce qui a été dit et analysé. Il s'impose plutôt d'examiner la perspective de ce qui lui reste d'exceptionnel et d'inédit. Sur ces aspects inédits, il manque une analyse comparée au plan du droit international, maillon manquant des différentes approches abordées. C'est à cet exercice intellectuel que s'est livrée notre étude, procédant à la relecture à l'aune des standards transnationaux de la justice arbitrale par le prisme d'autres normes sur l'arbitrage international, qu'elles soient d'origine étatique ou conventionnelle, de la pratique internationale et dans une certaine mesure de la jurisprudence.

Avec l’accroissement des échanges transfrontaliers entre entreprises associées et des moyens de contrôles des transactions internationales par les administrations fiscales, les risques de différends en matière de prix de transfert augmentent nécessairement. Si ces conflits ne sont pas résolus, ils peuvent entraîner des doubles impositions, principalement économiques, et constituer des obstacles pour la libre circulation des biens et des services dans une économie globalisée. Les contribuables et les Etats ont donc besoin de procédures efficaces pour résoudre ces situations, unanimement dénoncées par les organisations internationales et les contribuables. Or les procédures actuelles ne sont pas totalement satisfaisantes. La Commission européenne, puis l’O.C.D.E ont récemment mené des travaux d’envergure visant à en améliorer les mécanismes. Le règlement de la double imposition en matière de prix de transfert est incontestablement un sujet d’actualité. Ces travaux invitent à une analyse critique de l’ensemble des mécanismes internationaux de règlement de la double imposition résultant de la correction des prix de transfert. Ces procédures sont étudiées, les causes de dysfonctionnement recherchées et des mesures d’amélioration sont proposées, notamment à la lumière des récents travaux des organisations internationales. La première partie est consacrée à la procédure amiable dans le cadre des conventions fiscales bilatérales. L’analyse menée suit une approche chronologique des étapes de la procédure, depuis son ouverture jusqu’à la mise en oeuvre de l’accord amiable. La seconde partie traite des voies nouvelles de règlement des doubles impositions que constituent la médiation, la conciliation et l’arbitrage en matière fiscale. Une large place est consacrée à l’arbitrage qui est analysé tant sur le plan conventionnel, puisqu’il a été récemment intégré dans les conventions modèles O.C.D.E. et O.N.U., que dans le cadre de la convention européenne d’arbitrage. Cette étude fait largement référence à l’approche de l’O.C.D.E. et des principaux Etats partenaires de la France. Néanmoins, il ne s’agit pas là d’un exercice de droit comparé mais seulement d’une mise en exergue d’autres pratiques pour servir le propos. With increasing cross-border trade between associated enterprises and means of control of international transactions by the tax authorities, the risk of disputes over transfer pricing necessarily increase. If these conflicts are not resolved, they can lead to double taxation, mainly of economic nature, and constitute obstacles to the free movement of goods and services in a globalised economy. Taxpayers and States therefore need effective procedures to resolve these situations, unanimously denounced by international organizations and taxpayers. However, current procedures are not entirely satisfactory. The European Commission and the O.E.C.D. have recently completed extensive work to improve the mechanisms. Dispute resolution in transfer pricing is certainly a hot topic. A critical analysis of all international settlement mechanisms of double taxation arising from transfer pricing adjustments is conducted. These procedures are examined, the causes of dysfunction sought and improvement measures are proposed, particularly in light of recent work of international organizations. The first part is devoted to the mutual agreement procedure under bilateral double tax treaties. The analysis is carried out following a chronological approach of the stages of the procedure, from its opening till the implementation of the mutual agreement. The second part deals with the new ways of resolving transfer pricing double taxation that are mediation, conciliation and arbitration in tax matters. Emphasis is on arbitration that is analysed both in conventional terms, as it has recently been integrated into the O.E.C.D. and U.N. model conventions, and as part of the European arbitration convention. This work makes extensive reference to the O.E.C.D and France key partners’ approaches. Nevertheless, it is not a work of comparative law but only examples to illustrate other practices

L’esigenza di alleggerire il carico dei tribunali mediante forme di soluzione diverse e alternative al processo giurisdizionale trae le sue origini da esperienze culturali remote: l’arte della composizione del conflitto rappresenta un'attività di cui l’uomo si è fin da subito dovuto occupare, per lo meno dal momento in cui ha cominciato a vivere all’interno di una comunità, proprio perché si tratta di un’attività che sfiora tutti gli aspetti della vita sociale. La mediazione ha origini antichissime, infatti la necessità di sviluppare nei secoli procedure alle quali ricorrere per garantire un'ordinata convivenza e armonia sociale risale già all'antica Roma del V secolo A.C.: la prima delle XII Tavole (il più antico diritto scritto dell’antichità romana), richiama il tentativo di compromesso da esperirsi davanti al pretore con cui le parti in lite trovano un accordo sull’oggetto del contendere, nel qual caso il giudice è tenuto a consacrarlo con l’emanazione della sentenza mentre in caso di mancato raggiungimento di un accordo allora si sarebbero adite le vie giudiziali instaurando il processo. Le origini della mediazione trovano fondamento in tempi antichi anche in Paesi dell’estremo oriente ed in particolare in Cina dove la mediazione fu lo strumento principale nella risoluzione delle dispute: Confucio sosteneva che il modo migliore per dirimere una disputa fosse la persuasione morale e il raggiungimento di un accordo, piuttosto che la coercizione del Sovrano. L’idea stessa di “compromesso” è profondamente radicata nella cultura cinese, infatti non tener in alcun conto gli interessi dell’altra parte è considerato particolarmente deplorevole sul piano etico-giuridico ed il pensiero confuciano è promotore della mediazione, tanto che l’istituto continua tuttora ad essere praticato nella Repubblica Popolare Cinese. In tempi più recenti, dopo l’unificazione del Regno d’Italia e la conseguente stesura del codice di procedura civile del 1865, il legislatore ha dedicato ampio spazio alla composizione bonaria delle controversie, disciplinando la conciliazione nel titolo preliminare all'art.1, dando vita così alla figura professionale del giudice conciliatore: caratteristiche essenziali del procedimento consistevano nella compresenza della funzione conciliativa con quella giurisdizionale nel giudice conciliatore, la municipalità del giudice stesso e infine la completa assenza di formalità (il rito si svolgeva verbalmente) per consentire a tutti un facile accesso alla procedura. Se invece apriamo il Codice di procedura vigente, per trovare un accenno alla conciliazione bisogna aspettare l'art. 320, e questa sfiducia a cui è andata in contro la figura del giudice conciliatore è arrivata fino ai nostri giorni. Negli USA la mediazione fu introdotta come sistema volontario (nelle controversie sindacali tra le compagnie ferroviarie e i loro dipendenti) nel 1887, con la legge sul commercio tra gli Stati (Intestate Commerce Act), e a partire dalla fine degli anni ’60 trovò un applicazione sempre maggiore. Ma la svolta fondamentale si ebbe nel 1998, in occasione della modifica del Titolo 28° della Carta dei Diritti e nell'Alternative Dispute Resolution Act, che consacrarono il successo della cultura alternativa della gestione del conflitto nella società americana. Oggi il ricorso agli A.D.R. ha portato ad una riduzione del contenzioso giudiziario di quasi il 90%. Visto l’esito positivo avutosi oltreoceano, nell’aprile del 2002 la Commissione Europea ha presentato un Libro Verde relativo ai modi alternativi di risoluzione delle controversie in materia civile e commerciale per promuovere l’utilizzo della mediazione, ed in seguito alla Direttiva n. 2008/52/CE il governo italiano ha emanato il D.lgs. 28/2010 al fine di coordinare le disposizioni vigenti in materia di mediazione e conciliazione in ambito civile e commerciale, solo che appena due anni dopo, il 6 dicembre 2012, la Corte costituzionale ha dichiarato l'illegittimità del decreto per eccesso di delega legislativa, così che il governo Letta ha cercato di disciplinare nuovamente l'istituto con la Legge n.98/2013, sebbene stavolta la mediazione sia stata prevista come temporanea perché contemplata come obbligatoria per i soli quattro anni successivi alla sua entrata in vigore, a metà dei quali il ministero di giustizia avvierà un monitoraggio per valutare se la sperimentazione della procedura di mediazione ha funzionato. Speriamo che intanto la “cultura della mediazione” cominci a diffondersi anche in Italia.

Il a été longuement discuté de savoir si le système d'arbitrage est applicable pour régler les litiges administratifs qui concernent certains contrats administratifs ou d’autres sans rapport avec le contrat administratif. Dans cette thèse, les trois questions spécifiques sont analysées tour à tour : (1) Est-il possible pour un arbitre ou un tribunal arbitral de trancher des questions relevant du droit administratif? (2) Y a-t-il, ou devrait-il y avoir, des limitations à l'autorité des arbitres et des tribunaux arbitraux? (3) Enfin, après la délivrance d'une sentence arbitrale, quel rôle devrait jouer l'État dans la phase de contrôle judiciaire? La première question concerne l'arbitrabilité et a été discutée dans la première partie (FIRST PART: ARBITRABILITY). La deuxième question a été discutée dans la deuxième partie (SECOND PART: PARTICULAR QUESTIONS OF ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS IN ARBITRATION PROCEDURE). Enfin, sur la dernière question a fait l’objet d’une troisième partie (THIRD PART: JUDICIAL REVIEW AND EXECUTION OF ARBITRATION AWARD). Dans cette thèse, nous avons comparé les systèmes de quatre pays (Canada, Chine, France, Taïwan). En conclusion, nous pouvons donc conclure que l’évolution de la conception du contrat administratif implique de nombreux aspects, y compris les aspects juridiques, économiques, politiques et même culturels. Le développement de la fonction de contentieux administratif, comme ‘’subjectivement orienté" ou "objectivement orienté" aura une incidence sur l'acceptation de l'arbitrage en matière administrative. Dans l'ensemble, l'arbitrage sera plus acceptable dans les systèmes dont la fonction est plus ‘’subjectivement orientée" que dans ceux dont la fonction est "objectivement orientée". While arbitration has traditionally been considered as a means to resolve private disputes, its role in disputes involving administrative contracts is a crucial question in administrative law. In brief, the three specific questions are (1) Can arbitrators or arbitral tribunals decide issues involving administrative law? and (2) Is there, or should there be, any limitation on the authority of arbitrators or arbitral tribunals? (3) Moreover, after the issue of an arbitration award, what role should the State play in the judicial review phase? The first question, the issue of arbitrability, is discussed in part 1 (FIRST PART: ARBITRABILITY). The second question will be discussed in part 2 (SECOND PART: PARTICULAR QUESTIONS OF ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS IN ARBITRATION PROCEDURE). Finally, on the question of what happens after the arbitration award, we will discuss judicial review in part 3 (THIRD PART: JUDICIAL REVIEW AND EXECUTION OF ARBITRATION AWARD). We compare legal systems between the four countries: in France, in Canada, in China and in Taiwan. We believe that an administrative contract, at least in its function and conception, is gradually becoming different from a private contract. Innovation with respect to administrative contracts will also reflect the concentration and function of the administrative litigation systems in each country. In addition, the “objective” or “subjective” function of administrative litigation will also affect the degree of arbitrability, as well as arbitration procedures. Taken together, arbitration will be more acceptable in systems whose function is more “subjectively oriented” than in those whose function is “objectively oriented". Finally, “the arbitration of administrative matters” traditionally has been an important question in administrative and arbitration law. In the future, we will continue to see it shine in the doctrine and jurisprudence of both the administrative and arbitration law fields.

O presente estudo tem como objetivo superar as diversas noções genéricas a respeito da imparcialidade do árbitro e assim atribuir-lhe um conceito próprio, estabelecido a partir do reconhecimento da vital importância do exercício da influência das partes na relação jurídica processual. O estudo parte da premissa de que todas as experiências pretéritas do árbitro (como as de qualquer indivíduo) constituem condição necessária para que este forme pré-conceitos e assim conheça e decida um conflito e que, por isso, tais experiências e conceitos pretéritos sempre existem e sempre influenciam o julgador. Também é premissa de análise o ambiente institucional em que a arbitragem se desenvolve e no qual os profissionais buscam auferir capital simbólico que lhes possibilite êxito nas nomeações para a função de árbitro. Essas premissas impedem que se aprove a noção genérica da imparcialidade como equidistância, ausência de interesse próprio na solução do litígio ou ausência de outras influências no convencimento do árbitro além dos argumentos lançados pelas partes no litígio, e impõem o reconhecimento de um conteúdo apoiado na inexistência de barreira à influência que os argumentos das partes exercerão na decisão do árbitro (a despeito, portanto, de quaisquer outras influências às quais o julgador como todo indivíduo está sujeito). A identificação de um conteúdo para a imparcialidade é, todavia, insuficiente para a solução de problemas práticos, razão pela qual o presente estudo sugere sua operacionalização por norma concreta extraída de regras vinculantes que imponham um comportamento (art. 14, caput, da Lei de Arbitragem brasileira) ou um estado de coisas (art. 13, § 6º da Lei de Arbitragem brasileira) que atenda a certas premissas de estrutura e de conteúdo. As premissas de estrutura têm como finalidade garantir a coerência e coesão sistemáticas da norma concreta, ao passo que as premissas de conteúdo (extraídas de casos reais) buscam a coerência interna da norma, ou seja, a coerência entre o juízo hipotético-normativo e o juízo sobre o evento fático subjacente. Essas premissas são examinadas à luz do ambiente institucional no qual a arbitragem se desenvolve, caracterizado principalmente pela interdependência e contínuo contato entre profissionais, a constante troca de papéis a que tais profissionais se sujeitam (ora como árbitros, ora como advogados) e a assimetria de informação. Propostos um conteúdo e um método de operacionalizá-lo para a solução de casos concretos, o presente estudo procura desatrelar a imparcialidade e seus efeitos da noção geral de independência do árbitro, sem apelar para a imprecisa dicotomia subjetividade-objetividade. Reconhece, ainda, que do árbitro são demandadas posturas diferentes daquelas preconizadas aos juízes, razão pela qual a aplicação de regras equiparativas (tal como o art. 14, caput, da Lei de Arbitragem brasileira), além de não esgotar todas as hipóteses de ataque à imparcialidade, deve ser precedida de diversas adaptações. Reconhece, também, o sentido e o alcance do binômio ciência-aceitação na prática arbitral. Por fim, o estudo trata da diversa natureza entre o dever de revelação e a imparcialidade impostos ao árbitro, de cujas violações derivam consequências também distintas. The present study aims to overcome several general notions concerning the impartiality of the arbitrator and thus gives it a proper concept, drawn from the recognition of the vital importance of parties to exercise influence on the procedural legal relationship. The study assumes that all past experiences of the adjudicator (as any individual) constitute a necessary condition for him to create pre-conceptions and so understand and decide a conflict - and that therefore these experiences and past concepts always influence the adjudicator. The institutional environment in which the arbitration is developed and in which practitioners seek to derive symbolic capital that enables them to succeed in the nominations for the role of arbitrator is also a premise of analysis. This premise prevents from approving the generic notion of impartiality as "equidistance", "the absence of self-interest in the outcome of the case" or "the absence of other influences in the convincing process of the adjudicator beyond the arguments submitted by the parties in dispute", and requires the recognition of content based on the "absence of barriers to the influence that the arguments of the parties shall exercise on the arbitrator's decision" (regardless of any other influences to which the judge as any individual is exposed). Identifying content for impartiality is, however, insufficient for the solution of actual problems, and due to that, the study suggests its operation by a norm extracted from binding rules imposing conduct (art. 14, caput of Brazilian Arbitration Law) or a state of affairs (art. 13, § 6 of the Brazilian Arbitration Law) that meets certain premise of structure and content. The premise of structure is designed to provide systematic consistency and cohesion of the norm, and the premise of content (drawn from actual cases) seeks internal consistency of the standard, i.e., the consistency between the description of the event anticipated in the norm and the description of the underlying factual event. This premise is examined in the light of the institutional environment in which the arbitration is developed, mainly characterized by interdependence and continuous contact between professionals, the constant exchange of roles among such professionals (either as arbitrators or as lawyers) and information asymmetry. Proposed both a content and a method to operationalize it for the solution of actual cases, this study seeks to release fairness and its effects from the general notion of independence of the arbitrator, without resorting to imprecise objectivity-subjectivity dichotomy. It also recognizes that the institutional environment requires postures from the arbitrators that differ substantially from those required from judges; due to this reason, the application of rules that apparently prescribe the same standards or behaviors for both (such as art. 14, caput, the Brazilian Arbitration Law) does not fill all the hypothesis capable of menacing the impartiality and must be preceded by various adaptations. It also recognizes the meaning and scope of the binomial information-acceptance in arbitral practice. Finally, the study addresses the diverse nature of the duty of disclosure and impartiality imposed on the arbitrator, whose respective violations also imply different consequences.

Indiscutablement la sphère du droit public des affaires se déploie aujourd'hui dans un espace mondialisé, où les rapports entre les opérateurs se nouent en des termes qui différent radicalement de ceux qui posèrent les premiers linéaments de la matière au début du XXe siècle. Cela est en réalité lié aux tendances de fond qui touchent le monde contemporain. C'est donc dans un contexte profondément modifié par la globalisation, que les relations d'échanges internationaux et les litiges auxquels elles peuvent donner lieu s'envisagent désormais. On assiste ainsi, depuis déjà plusieurs décennies, à l’émergence d’un véritable droit public international des affaires. A cet endroit, le cas des marchés publics et des partenariats public-privé internationaux est particulièrement révélateur des mutations profondes qui taraudent la matière au niveau international. En effet, l'internationalisation des échanges économiques s'inscrit dans une réalité qui modifie en profondeur l'organisation des acteurs économiques et opère une vaste mutation des modalités d'intervention de la puissance publique; elle se fait maintenant dans un champ économique à l'échelle supra-nationale.

Dans beaucoup de législations nationales sur l’arbitrage, le principe de la non-arbitrabilité des litiges impliquant les personnes morales de droit public, en particulier l’Etat et les collectivités territoriales, est clairement posé, et ce depuis longtemps. Cette position s’explique aisément dans le système juridique français comme dans ceux qui s’en inspirent. La distinction entre la justice des particuliers et celle de l’administration, c’est à-dire de l’Etat, y est fermement établie.

L’expression « modes alternatifs de règlement des conflits » en vogue depuis quelques années et reprise dans l’intitulé de ce colloque est trompeuse. Elle procède d’une vision ethno-centrée moderne et plus spécifiquement occidentale et continentale du règlement des conflits. En effet, le qualificatif « alternatif » est employé par référence au mode de règlement des conflits actuellement privilégié par les sociétés modernes, notamment de la famille romano-germanique: la justice étatique. Or, historiquement, les sociétés traditionnelles les plus anciennes ne connaissaient pas de justice publique mais seulement des modes traditionnels et privés de résolution des litiges pacifiques comme la médiation, la conciliation et l’arbitrage, c’est-à-dire ceux que nous désignons « modes alternatifs de règlement des conflits », ou non pacifiques comme la vengeance privée.

Le recours à l'arbitrage par les opérateurs du commerce international a une finalité très importante, qui est celle de l'indemnisation appropriée et efficiente du préjudice. En vue d'évaluer celle-ci, notre étude adopte une recherche juridique détaillée en matière de réparation pour aboutir à un résultat satisfaisant concernant le principe le plus adapté en tant que cadre commun de l'opération d'évaluation de l'indemnisation du préjudice par les arbitres internationaux, en mettant notamment la lumière sur l'arbitrage CIRDI et CCI. À cette fin, il était nécessaire de suivre une analyse juridique tant sur les règles fondamentales que contingentes de l'indemnisation dans le souci d'avoir une perspective entière du processus de l'évaluation du quantum du préjudice. Un passage transversal était ainsi inéluctable sur les règles juridiques relatives à la réparation en droit privé français ainsi qu'en système juridique de Common Law. Au demeurant, un examen sur la codification de ces règles a été suivi dans le cadre des instruments internationaux de droit uniforme. Toutes ces réglementations ont inspiré le droit de l'arbitrage et ont servi comme des sources de celui-ci en matière de la réparation. Ces développements nous ont conduits à percevoir que l'indemnisation doit être adéquate en prenant en compte non seulement les préjudices subis, conformément au principe général de l'indemnisation intégrale, mais aussi tous les intérêts lésés. Sachant que certains préjudices ne sont pas mathématiquement évaluables, une indemnisation arbitraire s'impose dans ce cas. Un nouveau concept d' « indemnisation adéquate» du préjudice pourrait alors dans l'avenir s'imposer dans le droit de l'arbitrage international.

Alternative Dispute Resolution, or ’ADR’, offers parties in dispute an alternative to traditional court-based litigation, which is often seen as slow, costly and ineffective. ADR frequently involves a neutral third party who will settle or facilitate resolution of the dispute. This paper examines three common ADR mechanisms, adjudication, arbitration and mediation, and explores their relative advantages and disadvantages in different contexts.

Mediation has been a part of New Zealand’s employment statutory framework in one form or another for over a century, and has been the first port of call for employment disputes under the current Employment Relations Act for nearly 15 years.¹ I have been working as a mediator in this context for almost seven years in more than 1,000 mediations. Lawyers are playing a significant part in the field of mediation, with a large number representing clients in this forum on a regular basis. In an evaluation of 100 of my mediations over a ten-month period, 85% of parties were legally represented. This rate is consistent with anecdotal reporting across the employment mediation service. Lawyer representation in mediation is not unique to the employment context. There are various mediation schemes provided for under many New Zealand statutes as well as a wide raft of non-statutory mediation occurring in numerous settings. In my experience as a mediator with human rights and leaky building mediations, as well as working as a lawyer in a large commercial law firm, I am aware lawyers are representing clients in many other areas of mediation as well. Although there is a significant amount of mediation occurring and a large number of lawyers regularly appearing in mediation, my experience is that the majority of lawyers act in mediation as if they were in litigation and take an adversarial approach. My thesis is that lawyers have not adapted effectively to mediation and taken on the role of mediation advocacy. This paper explores the topic by first describing, in Part II, what I observe as lawyers’ adversarial approach in mediation. It then looks at other research to assess whether this experience is reflective of a wider issue. It finds there is evidence to support my observations. Part III analyses why lawyers are operating in an adversarial way in mediation and proposes several reasons this may be the case. Part IV puts forward what I propose is appropriate mediation advocacy. It sets out the knowledge, roles and skills required from lawyers when representing clients in mediation. Part V suggests what might be done to assist a shift away from the common, adversarial approach to effective mediation advocacy. This paper is written within the context of employment mediation in New Zealand. However, it draws on research from different jurisdictions and areas of practice so the conclusions it comes to may have more general application. The topic is not whether lawyers should be in mediation. I am not arguing that lawyers do not have a part to play in mediation. A lawyer well versed in mediation advocacy can play a highly effective part in the process. Leonard Riskin, one of the key authors on the topic of lawyers in mediation, expresses this even more strongly, saying he believes lawyers’ involvement is fundamental to mediation’s success.² Further, this paper is focused on lawyers representing parties in mediation and does not consider lawyers as mediators.