Bibliographie sélective OHADA

The significant increase in the development of world economy over the last few decades have been experienced a considerable increase in the number of commercial disputes. When there is any business and dealings with contracts the question of dispute must be happened. But all of the parties actually want to run their business well and smoothly. In recent world a massive part of global economy depends on the trans-border business. But disputes in such business dealings sometimes can be the reasons to become risk the inter-relation of those parties. Which can affect the global economy as a whole. Comparing to the disputes inside domestic entities the trans-border or international business disputes can arise as bigger problem because of different jurisdictions, diverse legal systems and tradition. International Court of Justice (ICJ) already has the jurisdiction to try all the international civil suits but Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanism also considered as a viable alternative to resolve the dispute over the court. The international arbitration arises as a way of alternative dispute resolution mechanism which upraise benefits both of the parties and maintain the confidentiality. In this paper details of international arbitration and the broader impact of this mechanism in the global business economy will be focused. The legal status and the implementation process of international arbitration also be the discussing point of this paper.

En dépit de l'importance cruciale de la justice au sein de notre société, il est manifeste que le système judiciaire béninois présente d'importants défis en matière d'accessibilité, d'efficacité et de confiance publique. Les coûts de la justice, la perte de contrôle des problèmes, les délais d’attente avant procès, la structure labyrinthique des tribunaux, l'impossibilité de se représenter seul, ainsi que le caractère inhospitalier des tribunaux constituent des indicateurs d'un système judiciaire défaillant. En effet, des limitations dans l'accès à la justice alimentent la méfiance des citoyens à l'égard du système judiciaire étatique. Dans un souci de célérité et d'efficacité de la justice, un vent de généralisation des modes alternatifs de règlement des conflits et de recours des technologies souffle sur les procédures judiciaires en général et sur les procédures civiles et commerciales en particulier. S’inscrivant dans cette logique, la loi n° 2020-08 du 23 Avril 2020 portant modernisation de la justice en République du Bénin n’a pas manqué de faire faire une place aux modes alternatifs de règlement des conflits. Elle met également un accent sur la dématérialisation progressive des procédures judiciaires concernant la saisine des juridictions, le suivi des procédures et le paiement électronique des frais afférents. Cependant, malgré ces mesures à encourager, les juridictions, au risque de rompre, ploient toujours devant les litiges fonciers et commerciaux. La présente étude a pour objet d'analyser les forces et les faiblesses du système judicaire béninois et vérifier si la modernisation des modes alternatifs de règlement des différends et l’intégration de la technologie dans les processus de résolution des différends peuvent être un vecteur de l’accès à la justice au Bénin. Despite the crucial importance of justice in our society, it is clear that the Beninese justice system presents significant challenges in terms of accessibility, efficiency and public trust. The costs of justice, the loss of control of problems, pre-trial waiting times, the labyrinthine structure of the courts, the inability to represent the costs of justice, the loss of control of problems, pre-trial waiting times, the labyrinthine structure of the courts, the inability to represent oneself, as well as the inhospitable nature of the courts are indicators of a broken justice system. Indeed, limitations in access to justice fuel citizens' mistrust of the state justice system. In the interests of speed and efficiency of justice, a wind of generalization of alternative methods of dispute resolution and recourse of technologies is blowing through judicial procedures in general and civil and commercial procedures in particular. In line with this logic, Law No. 2020-08 of 23 April 2020 on the modernization of justice in the Republic of Benin did not fail to make room for alternative methods of conflict resolution. It also emphasizes the gradual dematerialization of judicial procedures concerning the referral of cases to the courts, the monitoring of procedures and the electronic payment of related costs. However, despite these measures to be encouraged, the courts, at the risk of breaking down, are still bending before land and commercial disputes. The purpose of this study is to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the Beninese judicial system and to verify whether the modernization of alternative dispute resolution methods and the integration of technology into dispute resolution processes can be a vector of access to justice in Benin.

This article posits that the developing regulatory and governance framework surrounding artificial intelligence (AI) will greatly influence the field of alternative dispute resolution (ADR). Integrating artificial intelligence (AI) into alternative dispute resolution (ADR) methods heralds a transformation in our approach to achieving equitable and impartial justice. The article discusses AI's role in moulding ADR and potential future applications of AI in ADR. Furthermore, the paper examines the role of AI in assisting arbitrators during ADR cases and assesses the potential for AI to handle legal duties in ADR proceedings. Moreover, this study investigates how AI technology can enhance ADR processes, increasing their efficiency, precision, and accessibility. Despite the challenges that accompany this subject, the objective of this research is to achieve a balance between the positive and negative aspects of AI in arbitration, while preserving its core principles. Furthermore, the paper supplements the dialogue surrounding the future of AI in the legal industry. The researcher employs the mixed mode (qualitative and quantitative methodologies). The data has been collected through case studies from regions implementing AI-ADR, surveys, and interviews with ADR practitioners from legal professionals, judges, and affected parties to mitigate the procedural delay. Lastly, the researcher proposes pragmatic solutions and recommendations designed to streamline ADR as a means to foster a more equitable and efficient justice system.

International arbitration is a critical mechanism for resolving energy disputes, offering a neutral and efficient means for addressing complex cross-border issues. This research examines the role of UNCITRAL (United Nations Commission on International Trade Law) case law in shaping arbitration practices within the energy sector. By analyzing key UNCITRAL arbitral decisions, the study identifies emerging trends, procedural challenges, and key lessons learned from past energy-related disputes. It explores how the UNCITRAL Model Law provides a flexible framework for arbitral tribunals, ensuring fairness and impartiality in the resolution of disputes involving multiple jurisdictions and diverse stakeholders. Additionally, the research highlights the importance of UNCITRAL’s influence in enhancing the enforceability of arbitration awards and promoting consistency in energy dispute resolution. Through the review of significant case studies, the paper evaluates practical implications related to the application of international law principles, including the enforcement of contracts, good faith, and dispute resolution strategies. The study offers valuable insights for legal practitioners, policymakers, and stakeholders in the energy sector, recommending potential improvements to arbitration processes to foster greater predictability and efficiency in resolving energy disputes.

ENGLISH ABSTRACT: This study provides exploratory insight into the social justice mandate of the Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration (“CCMA”) in the context of labour relations in South Africa. As a vehicle for the advancement of social justice through the efficient resolution of labour disputes, the CCMA is a compelling actor in the pursuit of social justice in South Africa’s labour environment. Social justice as a legislative and policy imperative requires an investment in understanding its conceptual ideals and demands in order to empower those acting in its pursuit with the knowledge they need to fulfil its demands. The CCMA’s most critical functionary, its commissioner, holds the key to unlocking labour justice for many members of the public. One wonders, given the criticality of advancing social justice in labour relations, whether social justice is appropriately understood in order to enable the kind of decision-making that efficiently and consistently addresses the workings of power and inequality as they manifest in employment relationships. This study’s main provocation is to transform the pursuit of social justice (in the South African labour context, at least) from an elusive endeavour to a more tangible, realistic one. It attempts to offer a way of thinking about and applying social justice in the practice of labour dispute resolution in South Africa and the CCMA context. It critically explores the interwoven mechanisms of power, prejudice, and injustice and how these mechanisms work to sustain unequal labour relations. The commissioner’s role is thus a critical one, that involves a deliberate pursuit to recognise, understand and interrupt these movements of power and mitigate the effect of inequality. Any movement towards social justice that does not pay close attention to this matrix of power and prejudice threatens to dilute the transformative potency of social justice. This study identifies and discusses the decisions of commissioners that fall short of the kind of conscientious decision-making required by a mandate of social justice. Discussions in this study also point out significant achievements in centralising social justice principles in decision-making processes at the CCMA, where arbitrators, in reducing injustice and advancing justice in labour relations, show a conscientious consideration and appreciation of historical contexts, power, privilege and disadvantage. Living up to the constitutional imperative to transform society in the way of equality, commissioners ought to develop their agency and be empowered by the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, to disrupt inequality. This study contributes to the understanding and clarification of social justice and its implications for the South African labour environment. It also posits ubuntu as an important consideration in the balancing exercise required to achieve justice.

Il ne suffit pas d’adopter un nouvel Acte uniforme pour satisfaire à la demande ou garantir une sécurité juridique apparente du droit africain des affaires ou encore enrichir le régime uniforme du règlement des différends dans l’espace OHADA ; ou même pallier le vide législatif qui existait encore au sein de l’OHADA sur la médiation. Il ne s’agit pas d’un Acte uniforme de plus, mais d’un réel instrument juridique qui pourrait favoriser le retour des investisseurs et améliorer les conditions des affaires dans l’espace OHADA. Il faut chercher à savoir si cette nouvelle approche de la justice sera une réussite dans ledit espace.

禁诉令是一种起源于英国的处理平行程序的独特救济方式，其在国际商事仲裁中的适用，不同于在国际民事诉讼程序中的适用，主要是为了协调法院与仲裁庭之间的管辖权冲突，往往不涉及公共利益，且对国际礼让的考察相对宽松。国际商事仲裁中禁诉令的签发主体包括法院和仲裁庭，经对比研讨可发现，这两者签发禁诉令条件的起点都在确认仲裁协议的有效性，且最明显的差别在于对国际礼让因素的考察。我国商事仲裁禁诉令制度的立法和实践几乎为空白，这使得我国落后于国际禁诉令制度的发展趋势，学者对于在国内使用禁诉令众说纷纭，并各自提出了相应的解决方案，这对我国禁诉令制度的构建启发颇深。 Anti-suit injunctions are a unique form of relief that originated from the UK for dealing with parallel proceedings. Their application in international commercial arbitration differs from that in international civil litigation, mainly aiming to reconcile jurisdictional conflicts between courts and arbitral tribunals. The issuance of such injunctions often does not involve public interests and the examination of international comity is relatively lenient. In international commercial arbitration, the issuers of anti-suit injunctions include courts and arbitral tribunals. Through comparative study, it can be found that the starting point for both to issue anti-suit injunctions is the confirmation of the validity of the arbitration agreement, and the most obvious difference lies in the examination of the international comity factor. The legislation and practice of the anti-suit injunction system in China’s commercial arbitration are almost blank, which makes China lag behind the development trend of the international anti-suit injunction system. Scholars have diverse opinions on the use of anti-suit injunctions domestically and have proposed corresponding solutions respectively, which provide significant inspiration for the construction of China’s anti-suit injunction system.

La mediación y el arbitraje en línea han surgido como soluciones eficaces para la resolución de conflictos en un mundo digitalizado, ofreciendo ventajas como reducción de costos, accesibilidad y flexibilidad horaria. Sin embargo, enfrentan desafíos como la brecha digital y la seguridad de la información. Un estudio basado en encuestas a profesionales y usuarios confirma la utilidad de estas herramientas, pero subraya la necesidad de mejorar la infraestructura tecnológica y establecer marcos regulatorios claros. A pesar de los obstáculos, estos métodos representan una evolución significativa en la gestión de disputas legales.

The freedom of the parties to choose the applicable law to the merits is often presented as an important benefit of arbitrating disputes involving intellectual property (IP). Yet, the reality is more uncertain and controversial than is commonly assumed. Is party autonomy really permitted in IP arbitration? Should it be? This article answers these questions with regard to patents, trademarks, and copyrights, using recent examples drawn from arbitral practice. It first examines the situation where the parties only made a choice of contract law, and considers in this regard whether that law can and/or should be extended to infringement claims and/or the remedies to infringement, either directly or through the technique of characterization. After discussing the impact of overriding mandatory rules in contractual IP cases, the article then examines the situation where the parties chose a law to govern IP questions, including by way of a broad choice-of-law agreement covering non-contractual problems. It seeks to provide as much guidance as possible to arbitral tribunals, using mainly the distinction among infringement, ownership, and validity issues, and by distinguishing among different scenarios in which party autonomy is more or less acceptable.

Le tribunal arbitral tranche le litige conformément aux règles de droit, mais cette garantie est fragile car le législateur OHADA ajoute à moins que les parties lui aient conféré mission de statuer en amiable composition. Ces amiables compositeurs sont donc des arbitres qui peuvent ne pas appliquer la loi, qui peuvent statuer en équité, ce qui implique la reconnaissance, aux arbitres, d’un pouvoir modérateur sur les obligations contractuelles litigieuses. Mais cette autorisation de statuer en amiable composition ne leur interdit pas de statuer en droit, simplement, le tribunal arbitral amiable compositeur qui appliquerait exclusivement les règles de droit, doit s’expliquer sur la conformité de celles-ci à l’équité. L’arbitrage tend aussi à la satisfaction de l’idéal du procès équitable. C’est ainsi que l’équité est une exigence dans la constitution et lors des suites du tribunal arbitral. The arbitral tribunal shall decide the dispute in accordance with the rules of law; but this guarantee is fragile because the OHADA legislator adds unless the parties have given him the mission to rule in amicable composition. These amicable composers are therefore arbiters who may not apply the law, who can rule in equity; which implies the recognition, to the arbitrators, of a moderating power over the disputed contractual obligations. But this authorization to rule in amicable composition does not prevent them from ruling in law. Clearly, the amicable arbitral tribunal which would exclusively apply the rules of law, must explain their compliance with fairness. Arbitration also tends to satisfy the ideal of a fair trial. This is how fairness becomes a requirement in the constitution and during the proceedings of the arbitral tribunal.

La présente contribution intitulée « Le règlement des différends en matière d’environnement au Cameroun » ; vise la mise en œuvre des règles de protection de l’environnement de par l’impact des actes mis en cause ou du préjudice causé, selon l’origine des acteurs ou selon les règles invocables. Ce faisant, elle s’intéresse aux solutions qu’apportent certaines dispositions relatives à la matière environnementale au cameroun. A l’analyse, on observe dans la première hypothèse, que les modes alternatifs de règlement non contentieux des différends se veulent plus rapide et accessibles tout en favorisant le respect des lois environnementales. Dans la seconde hypothèse, il s’agit de faire appel au juge judiciaire pour trancher les différends. De par son impact, la position du juge apparaît comme l’outil essentiel d’identification des dommages susceptibles d’être causés à l’environnement et constituant le socle sur lequel est construit le plan de gestion de l’environnement. The present contribution entiled « The settlement of environmental disputes in Cameroon » ; aims at the implementation of environmental protection rules according to the impact of the acts in question or of the damage caused, depending on the origin of the impact or according to the invocable rules. In doing so, it looks at the solutions provited by certain provisions relating to environmental matters in Cameroun. On analysis, it can be observed in the first hypothesis, the alternative methods of non-contentious settlement of disputes that are intented to be faster and more accessible while promoting compliance with environmental laws. In the second hyperthesis, it is a question of appealing to the judicial judge to settle disputes. Because of its impact, the position of the judge appears to be the essentiel tool for identifying the damage likely to be caused to the environment and constituting the basis on which the environmental management plan is built.

In an era where technology is rapidly transforming the legal landscape, Transforming Arbitration explores how innovations like AI, blockchain, the Metaverse, and Web3 are reshaping arbitration as a key form of dispute resolution. The book features insights from leading academics, practitioners, and policymakers, offering a comprehensive look at how these advancements are influencing our conceptual, substantive and procedural understandings of many parts of this field. Each chapter examines the challenges and opportunities presented by these technologies, raising important questions about the compatibility of traditional arbitration processes with digital innovations. As the legal field adapts to developments like cryptocurrencies, NFTs, and 'virtual' disputes, this book provides valuable guidance on the future implications for arbitration. By questioning established norms and advocating for fresh approaches, Transforming Arbitration is a vital resource for legal professionals and scholars committed to evolving with the times. Combining theoretical exploration with practical recommendations, this collaborative volume equips the legal community with the tools to navigate the complexities of our digital age with confidence and foresight.

رغم تعدد الوسائل التي يمكن للأطراف اللجوء إليها لحل منازعاتهم إلا أننا نجد في الوقت الحاضر أن أطراف النزاع البحري غالبا ما يفضلون اللجوء إلى التحكيم دون غيره من الوسائل لتسوية المنازعات أيا كان سبب نشوؤها، فالأصل في مجال العقود البحرية أصبح هو وجود النص التعاقدي الذي يلزم التحكيم نظرا لتشعب المصالح المقترنة بالمعاملات والعلاقات البحرية الدولية، ومن تم فلا يكاد يخلوا عقد من عقودها من النص على أن المنازعات التي قد تنشأ بخصوص ذلك العقد تحل عن طريق التحكيم لمساهمته في تفعيل الأنشطة البحرية وإستقرار معاملاتها، فيتفق الأطراف على إحالة تلك المنازعات إلى محكمين متخصصين وخبراء في المجال البحري ليفصلوا فيها بأحكام تحكيمية نهائية وملزمة، مما ساعد على نجاحه في التصدي لمختلف المنازعات البحرية التي تتميز بالتشعب والتعقيد.

The State Judge's Relinquishment of Jurisdiction over Arbitration Agreements under Ohada Law. The use of arbitration instead of state judges is increasingly popular in the business world. The parties to contracts thus prefer to choose a judge more quickly and less cumbersomely, with more confidentiality and less publicity. If the advantages of resorting to arbitration are undoubted, its effects leading to the total withdrawal of state jurisdictions attract the attention of many. The incompetence of the judge due to arbitration then tends to completely rule out the latter, which merits a better understanding of the powers and competence of the arbitrator and a good understanding of the place of the state judge in the arbitration procedure.

This thesis critically examines a much-debated issue in international law: the legitimacy of the Investor-State Dispute Settlement system (ISDS). The system was initially conceived to provide an alternate dispute resolution mechanism for the protection and promotion of foreign investment. In time, this objective has incited a discussion on the legitimacy of the system as the developed world has started to experience the role of host states. Since then, they have taken the lead in the reform process to achieve a balance between host state's and foreign investors' rights. To this effect, both the European Union (EU) and the Third Way Approaches to International Law (TWAIL) are for centralization of the system arguing its current problems emanate from its ad hoc and decentralized nature. Although both are aimed at system centralization, the paths they take to achieve it clearly differ. The EU seeks a permanent investment court by which ad hoc arbitration would give way to a more centralized framework. However, TWAIL advocates for a return to the pre-ISDS era, where national courts resolve investment disputes between foreign investors and states. The effectiveness of these two reform ideas in addressing the purported legitimacy concerns of the ISDS is critically examined in this thesis using Martti Koskenniemi's legal approach. Ultimately, it asserts that neither proposal is adequate to resolve the legitimacy issue of the system, as legitimacy can only be achieved by strengthening the principle of justice, which is feasible alone through a more decentralized structure.

L’arbitrage étant l’un des modes alternatifs de règlement des différends, sa particularité est qu’il est confidentiel, secret, rapide, conventionnel et juridictionnel. En ce qui concerne spécifiquement l’obligation de confidentialité et de secret, son étendue est double. D’abord, il y a l’étendue matérielle, qui porte sur la procédure arbitrale, la composition du tribunal arbitral, la nature du litige, les ordonnances du tribunal arbitral, les documents soumis par les parties litigantes, les délibérations et la sentence. En second lieu, il y a l’étendue personnelle, qui concerne les témoins, les parties, les arbitres, le comité d’arbitrage, l’institution ou le centre d’arbitrage, le secrétaire du tribunal arbitral, les experts et tous les autres intervenants de la procédure arbitrale. La problématique centrale est d’analyser comment la confidentialité, le secret, la protection des données personnelles, y compris dans l’hypothèse du recours à l’intelligence artificielle peut être adressée et solutionnée dans le cadre d’une procédure arbitrale.

Le sujet de thèse explore comment définir les critères d’arbitrabilité des litiges acceptés par la justice arbitrale et étatique en France et dans l’espace OHADA. Les recherches ont montré que chaque système juridique a déjà des critères établis par les législateurs et la doctrine. L’arbitrage, étant à la fois juridictionnel et conventionnel, implique une interaction entre les justices arbitrales et étatiques, nécessitant des critères d’arbitrabilité efficaces. Ces critères doivent distinguer clairement les litiges arbitrables des inarbitrables et repartir soigneusement les compétences entre les juridictions. Alors, notre thèse questionne l’efficacité de ces critères et propose des améliorations pour remédier à leurs limites. The thesis topic explores how to define the arbitrability criteria of disputes accepted by arbitration and state justice in France and in the OHADA space. Research has shown that every legal system already has criteria set by legislators and doctrine. Arbitration, being both jurisdictional and conventional, involves an interaction between the arbitral and state courts, requiring effective arbitrability criteria. These criteria must clearly distinguish between arbitrable and non-arbitrable disputes and carefully allocate jurisdiction between the courts. So, our thesis questions the effectiveness of these criteria and proposes improvements to remedy their limitations.