Bibliographie sélective OHADA

The processes by which a model of social regulation channels its way of resolving conflicts make the strength of its conflict resolution system. Court justice has lost its exemplary function. The crisis of effectiveness and the crisis of legitimacy that the processual mode of dispute resolution is undergoing in our States, make it a justice system that is considered to have broken down. The need for justice thus directly raises the question of social regulation, the relevant model of social regulation. The call for a ‘right to sue’ open to the system of alternative dispute resolution rather than restrictively to the judiciary to resolve disagreements is the spearhead of the combinatorial approach to the administration of conflicts, the ferment of a plural approach to access to justice. Has Cameroonian law begun to renew its vision of the right to take legal action? Does it renew the dominant classical approach to the system of social regulation? The study notes the global and integral recognition of the alternative dispute resolution system, another, less contentious, way of dealing with disputes, the emergence within the traditional dispute resolution system of a right to amicable dispute resolution, but in an embryonic state. It then poses, in a prospective approach, the need for a unitary and global approach to private justice as challenges to be met to ensure the quality of this form of justice.

Le recours à l’arbitrage en matière des litiges contractuels entre des parties privées présente des avantages par rapport aux procédures devant les tribunaux. Les avantages de l’arbitrage qui a une valeur particulière en matière contractuelle se multiplient : les arbitres peuvent être choisis en raison de leurs compétences spéciales selon le sujet du contrat; la confidentialité peut être préservée; l’arbitrage peut être utilisé pour régler des questions sur le même sujet ou des sujets semblables mais survenant dans des pays différents, ceci peut présenter l'avantage de régler en une seule fois tous les différends entre les parties, surtout en matière de commerce.

Dans une économie de plus en plus globalisée, faute d’harmonisation juridique, les parties aux litiges contractuels n’hésitent plus à consulter les forums juridiques pour identifier les pays susceptibles de leur offrir le meilleur niveau de protection. Presque tous les litiges en matière contractuels se prêtent au début des conflits à la médiation. Il arrive souvent que lors d’un litige relatif aux droits contractuels, les parties recourent à la médiation. Cependant, pour pouvoir y recourir de manière utile, il est important d’éluder certains obstacles. Un litige ayant trait à un contrat, soulève des questions complexes de faits et de droit, peut nécessiter des dépenses importantes et exiger la présence de témoins experts. Puisque l’obligation contractuelle émise sera presque toujours un enjeu, un litige ayant trait au commerce, notamment international, commande une connaissance approfondie de la législation sur les objets de transactions, ainsi qu’une expérience des tribunaux qui traitent la plupart du temps de ces questions. En pratique, l’espace de rencontre entre la médiation et les litiges contractuels est le contrat lui-même. Or, le domaine contractuel est le domaine privilégié de la médiation. En réalité, la médiation peut avoir lieu dans les relations liée aux contrats de commerce, dans lequel une dévolution des droits contractuels est prévue. Ce mode alternatif fournit un moyen pour éviter les contentieux judiciaires.

La place de l'arbitrage en droit de l'investissement est discutée. Les réfutations à son encontre grandissent. De nombreuses problématiques édulcorent la définition même de la notion d'investissement. Les controverses doctrinales restent toujours nombreuses et débattues à ce sujet. De même, des doctrines s'affrontent sur la question de savoir s'il faut ou non élaborer un corps de règles cohérentes pour des sentences arbitrales homogènes. L'opposition à l'arbitrage dans le droit de l'investissement se retrouve aussi dans les problématiques liées à l'exequatur des sentences arbitrales liées à l'arbitrage d'investissement dans l'Union européenne. Un manque de soutien apparent au développement de l'arbitrage dans l'Union européenne s'est installé, comme le démontre le récent traité CETA conclu entre l'Union européenne et le Canada. L'arbitrage d'investissement ferait courir le risque d'un recul de la souveraineté. En effet, du fait l'arbitrage d'investissement, les Etats seraient moins incités à légiférer sur des matières pouvant avoir un impact sur l'activité d'une entreprise étrangère, par crainte d'une procédure arbitrale. Un lien délicat apparait alors, entre souveraineté et arbitrage d'investissement. Plusieurs doctrines se sont longtemps affrontées, notamment celle élaborée par Calvo et Drago en Amérique Latine entre 1870 et 1900, proposant de réduire les droits des investisseurs étrangers, face à une doctrine opposée, celle militant pour un standard minimum international de protection des investisseurs étrangers. Or, une renaissance de ces débats apparaît aujourd'hui, avec une problématique liée à la souveraineté de plus en plus ancrée dans les débats liés à l'arbitrage d'investissement. Pourtant, l'arbitrage d'investissement doit être perçu comme une méthode permettant à des investisseurs de bénéficier d'un arbitre indépendant et permettant de « dépolitiser » les contentieux. Mais des Etats admettent de moins en moins que leurs lois établies démocratiquement pour l'intérêt général puissent être contestées par des investisseurs étrangers devant un tribunal arbitral. Des auteurs parlent de « chilling effect », par lequel des Etats n'osent plus légiférer, par crainte de contentieux ultérieurs. De plus en plus d'Etats refusent que leur droit soit remis en cause par des juges privés. Plusieurs questions se posent. Est-il toujours concevable de protéger davantage un investisseur étranger qu'un investisseur national ? Est-il légitime de privilégier des juges privés, plutôt que des juges nationaux pour trancher les litiges en matière d'investissement ? L'utilité de l'arbitrage peut être comprise, dans des pays où la justice étatique est dite « corrompue » ou « biaisée ». En pareille situation, un investisseur étranger est légitime à vouloir saisir un arbitre neutre et indépendant. Mais la légitimité d'avoir recours à l'arbitrage dans des pays développés bénéficiant d'une justice étatique indépendante pose plus de difficultés. Dès lors, faudrait-il limiter l'arbitrage d'investissement aux pays souffrant d'un déficit d'indépendance de justice étatique ? Et donc d'exclure ce mode de règlement des litiges en la matière dans l'Union européenne ? La « politisation » du débat est en pleine renaissance. L'arbitrage d'investissement est un domaine relativement jeune et il convient de se demander s'il s'agit là d'un mode de règlement des litiges adéquat et d'un mode adapté au commerce international en général ? Assistera-t-on prochainement ou assiste-t-on déjà à ce que des auteurs qualifient de « fin de cycle » ? Il s'agit de questions ancrées dans l'actualité, que ce soit en France ou ailleurs dans le monde. The place of arbitration in investment law is discussed. The rebuttals are growing. Many issues water down the very definition of the notion of investment. The doctrinal controversies are still numerous and debated on this subject. Similarly, doctrines clash on the question of whether or not it is necessary to develop a body of coherent rules for homogeneous arbitral awards. The opposition to arbitration in investment law is also found in issues related to the exequatur of arbitral awards related to investment arbitration in the European Union. An apparent lack of support for the development of arbitration in the European Union has set in, as demonstrated by the recent CETA treaty concluded between the European Union and Canada. Investment arbitration would run the risk of a decline in sovereignty. Indeed, because of investment arbitration, States would be less encouraged to legislate on matters that could have an impact on the activity of a foreign company, because of the fear of arbitration proceedings. A delicate link then appears between sovereignty and investment arbitration. Several doctrines have long clashed, in particular the one developed by Calvo and Drago in Latin America between 1870 and 1900, proposing to reduce the rights of foreign investors, in front of an opposing doctrine, that campaigning for a minimum international standard of protection for foreign investors. A revival of these debates is appearing today, with an issue linked to sovereignty increasingly rooted in the debates linked to investment arbitration. However, investment arbitration must be seen as a method allowing investors to benefit from an independent arbitrator and allowing disputes to be “depoliticised”. But states admit less and less that their laws democratically established for the general interest can be challenged by foreign investors before an arbitration tribunal. Authors talk about the “chilling effect”, by which States no longer dare to legislate, because of the fear of subsequent litigation. More and more States refuse to have their rights challenged by private judges. Several questions arise. Is it always conceivable to protect a foreign investor more than a national investor ? Is it legitimate to favor private judges, rather than national judges, to settle investment disputes ? The usefulness of arbitration can be understood in countries where state justice is said to be “corrupt” or “biased”. In such a situation, a foreign investor is legitimate in wanting to seize a neutral and independent arbitrator. But the legitimacy of having recourse to arbitration in developed countries benefiting from independent state justice arouses more difficulties. Therefore, should investment arbitration be limited to countries suffering from a lack of independence of state justice ? And therefore to exclude this method of settling disputes in this area in the European Union ? The “politicization” of the debate is in full revival. Investment arbitration is a relatively young field and it is worth asking whether it is an adequate mode of dispute resolution and a mode suitable for international trade in general ? Will we soon witness or are we already witnessing what some authors describe as the “end of the cycle” ? These are issues rooted in the news, whether in France or elsewhere in the world.

The author of Third Party Funding in International Arbitration challenges the structural inconsistencies of the current practices of arbitration funding by arguing that third party funding should be a forum of justice, rather than a forum of profit. The author introduces a new methodology with an alternative way of structuring third party funding to solve a set of practical problems generated by the risk of claim control by the funder.

The main purpose of this research is to explain and identify the major Investor-State Arbitration (ISA) problems in Afghanistan. Afghanistan's government is committed to providing legal security for the resolution of foreign investment disputes. The dispute resolution system's assessment is very important for foreign investors because they pay special attention to the dispute resolution system and consider it a criterion for their investments. This research will be the first comprehensive study about the Investor-State Arbitration problems in Afghanistan. In the writing of this research, the library method has been used. To extract reasons, laws, books, articles, and reliable scientific sources have been used. Afghanistan is a good market for foreign investment because it has good investment opportunities in different sectors. Foreign investors can choose the easiest and best mechanisms, such as arbitration in their contracts to deal with disputes. But the resolution of foreign investment through arbitration has some problems, and sometimes foreign investors are facing challenges with the settlement of their disputes through arbitration internationally and domestically in Afghanistan.

Dans la conception traditionnelle de la diplomatie, l'action extérieure des États est cantonnée aux domaines politique, économique et culturel. Le droit est plus rarement pris en compte comme outil d'influence dans l'action extérieure des États.Or, le droit joue un rôle fondamental dans la diplomatie économique. En effet, un pays qui n'est pas capable de défendre son système juridique est un pays qui économiquement est en péril, car c'est un pays qui ne peut pas s'exporter.Si la France par exemple, ou d'autres pays, se mettent à la remorque de l'Alternative Dispute Resolution jusque dans leur propre droit interne, ces pays ne pourront plus exporter leur système juridique au risque de ne plus pouvoir exporter tout court. Ils risquent alors de perdre une partie essentielle et substantielle de leur capacité de projection sur la scène internationale.De même, lorsque la francophonie économique perd du terrain, c'est tout un pan de la diplomatie économique qui perd de sa force de frappe.Avec les clauses compromissoires et clauses de médiation inspirées des modèles anglo-saxons qui se répandent dans les contrats internationaux, comment les juridictions des pays francophones qui ont été calquées sur le système judicaire français pourront-elles continuent à exister ? Les arbitres anglo-saxons finiront-ils par imposer lentement mais sûrement la Common law ? Il y a là un enjeu de diplomatie économique énorme.Nous verrons comment défendre au mieux la francophonie économique et juridique en évitant que l'Alternative Dispute Resolution ne devienne le cheval de Troie du droit anglo-saxon, avec à terme, le risque que des systèmes nationaux disparaissent.Ce sont là des questions légitimes et très graves, et l'on peut comprendre qu'elles soient posées avec une certaine persistance.Avec l'élargissement continu du champ des relations internationales, le droit doit devenir l'objet d'une politique extérieure stratégique à part entière. C'est pourquoi nous plaidons pour la mise en place d'une diplomatie juridique française et formulons des recommandations ainsi qu'une stratégie d'influence juridique extérieure.En prenant la défense et en illustrant le droit continental et le droit français dans le droit global à travers les exemples de la médiation et de l'arbitrage international, nous espérons contribuer à l'ébauche d'une théorie de la diplomatie juridique et à ouvrir des pistes nouvelles de réflexion en matière d'influence internationale, en particulier d'influence juridique internationale.Nous espérons contribuer ainsi modestement mais utilement à la défense du droit français et du droit continental pour que la confrontation et la compétition des système juridiques n'aboutissent pas à la domination d'un système juridique sur un autre mais que cette compétition aille au contraire dans le sens d'un meilleur équilibre entre les systèmes juridiques, dans le sens du progrès et de l'amélioration du droit français et du droit continental, mais aussi - s'il se peut -dans le sens des progrès dans la défense des causes et des valeurs universelles. In the traditional conception of diplomacy, the external action of States is confined to the political, economic and cultural domains. Law is more rarely taken into account as a tool of influence in the external action of States.However, Law plays a fundamental role in economic diplomacy. Indeed, a country that is not able to defend its legal system is a country that is economically in danger, because it is a country that cannot be exported. If France, for example, or other countries, follow the Alternative Dispute Resolution right up to their own domestic law, these countries will no longer be able to export their legal system at the risk of no longer being able to export at all. They then risk losing an essential and substantial part of their ability to project themselves on the international scene.Similarly, when the economic Francophonie loses ground, a whole section of economic diplomacy loses its strike force.With arbitration clauses and mediation clauses inspired by Anglo-Saxon models that are spreading in international contracts, how will the courts of French-speaking countries that have been modeled on the French judicial system be able to continue to exist? Will Anglo-Saxon arbitrators end up slowly but surely imposing the Common law? There is a huge stake in economic diplomacy here.We will see how best to defend the economic and legal Francophonie by preventing the Alternative Dispute Resolution from becoming the Trojan horse of Anglo-Saxon law, with the eventual risk that national systems will disappear.These are legitimate and very serious questions, and one can understand that they are asked with a certain persistence.With the continuous widening of the field of international relations, Law must become the object of a strategic foreign policy. This is why we plead for the establishment of a French legal diplomacy and formulate recommendations as well as a strategy of external legal influence.By defending and illustrating continental law and French law in global law through the examples of mediation and international arbitration, we hope to contribute to the sketch of a theory of legal diplomacy and to open new paths of reflection in terms of international influence, in particular international legal influence.We hope in this way to contribute modestly but usefully to the defense of French law and continental law so that the confrontation and competition of legal systems does not lead to the domination of one legal system over another but that this competition goes on the contrary in the sense of a better balance between legal systems, in the direction of progress and improvement of French law and continental law, but also - if possible - in the direction of progress in the defense of universal causes and values.

There is a growing stream of critics who see investment arbitration in favor of foreign investors and as a negative force as opposed to sustainable development. The phenomenon of third-party funding and its use in investment arbitration has increased such concerns. Third-party funding is basically the payment of all or a part of the arbitration costs of one of the parties of dispute by a third party funder which in return, the funder receives a percentage of the output of the award if successful. The purpose of this article is to explain and analyze the theoretical differences between pros and cons of third-party funding regarding the access to justice, screening mechanism for the claims, and the financial consequences on the host state. In this article, the advocates see third-party funding as a means of access to justice for aggrieved investors in investment claims, while the adversaries refering on the profitability of third-party funding, see this method in arbitration a form of wealth transfer from public sector to private corporations and also refer to the asymmetric structure of the investment arbitration regime as well as the risks arising from the transfer of management and control of arbitration process to the third party funders. یک جریان رو به رشدی از منتقدان وجود دارد که داوری سرمایه‌گذاری را به نفع سرمایه‌گذاران خارجی و بعنوان یک نیروی منفی در تضاد با توسعه پایدار می‌داند. پدیده تأمین مالی ثالث و بکارگیری آن در داوری سرمایه‌گذاری به این نگرانی‌ها افزوده است. تأمین مالی ثالث اساساً پرداخت تمام یا بخشی از هزینه‌های داوری یکی از طرفین دعوی توسط تأمین کننده شخص ثالث است که در ازای آن، تأمین کننده مالی درصدی از رأی صادره را در صورت پیروزی دریافت می‌نماید. هدف مقاله، تشریح و تحلیل اختلافات نظری موافقان و مخالفان تأمین مالی ثالث در خصوص دستیابی به عدالت، غربالگری دعاوی و تبعات مالی آن بر دولت است. در این مقاله موافقان، تأمین مالی ثالث را ابزاری جهت دستیابی به عدالت برای سرمایه‌گذاران زیان‌دیده در دعاوی سرمایه‌گذاری در نظر می‌گیرند در حالی که مخالفان با اتکا به اهداف سودآوری تأمین مالی ثالث، این روش را در داوری نوعی انتقال ثروت از بخش عمومی به بخش خصوصی می‌دانند و به ساختار نامتقارن رژیم داوری سرمایه‌گذاری و خطرات ناشی از انتقال مدیریت و کنترل فرایند داوری به تأمین کنندگان شخص ثالث نیز اشاره می‌نمایند.

The final and binding nature of international arbitral awards results in the nullification of the rights of the parties to file legal remedies against the arbitral award, as is the case with decisions of national courts that can be appealed, appealed, or reviewed. However, Article 68 paragraph (2) of Law Number 30 of 1999 concerning arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution provides an opportunity for parties who refuse to recognize and implement an international arbitral award that can be appealed to, as well as Article 70 must also be explained that Article this applies only to national arbitrations. This of course creates legal uncertainty, disuse, and injustice for the parties. Therefore, what is highlighted in this research is what is the position of the final and binding international arbitration award in Indonesia. The research method used in this article is legal research using primary and secondary legal materials. The results of the research show that the position of international arbitral awards in Indonesia is not the same as the decisions of national courts because they cannot be appealed, cassated, and reviewed. Therefore, it is necessary to completely amend international arbitration arrangements by removing Article 68 paragraph (2) of Law Number 30 of 1999 concerning Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution in order to provide legal certainty, benefit, and justice for the parties.

Alors que deux entreprises sont liées par une convention d’arbitrage, une procédure d’insolvabilité est ouverte en Belgique à l’égard de l’une d’elles. De nombreuses questions émergent : L’instance arbitrale en cours doit-elle être suspendue ? Dans la positive, pourra-t-elle reprendre ? Les pouvoirs de l’arbitre sont-ils impactés ? L’instance n’a pas débuté, la validité de la convention d’arbitrage est-elle compromise ? La convention n’existe pas, les parties peuvent-elles la conclure ? L’entreprise en difficulté perd-elle sa capacité compromissoire ? Cette capacité est-elle transférée au praticien de l’insolvabilité ? La sentence a été rendue, peut-elle être exécutée ? Dans le présent exposé, nous mettons l’arbitrage à l’épreuve des procédures belges d’insolvabilité d’entreprises.

Günümüzde ticaretin globalleşmesi ile birlikte tahkim, uluslararası uyuşmazlıkların çözümünde devlet mahkemelerine nazaran kişiler, şirketler ve devletler tarafından daha çok tercih edilir hale gelmiştir. Bu tercihin en önemli sebeplerinden biri tahkim yargılaması sonucunda verilen hakem kararlarının tıpkı mahkeme kararlarında olduğu gibi kesin ve bağlayıcı olmasıdır. Ancak aleyhine karar verilen taraf, ilgili hakem kararının adalete uygun olmadığını düşünebilir. Bu bağlamda hakem kararlarının devlet mahkemeleri tarafından denetlenebilmesi için neredeyse tüm milli hukuk sistemlerinde hakem kararlarına karşı denetim yolu olarak "iptal davası" öngörülmüştür. İptal talebinde bulunan taraf belirli sebeplerin olması halinde tahkim yeri mahkemesinde iptal davası açabilecektir. Hakem kararına karşı iptal talebinde bulunan tarafın amacı, kararın bir kısmını ya da tamamını geçersiz hale getirmek ve icrasını engellemektir. UNCITRAL Model Kanun ve ulusal hukuk sistemlerinde iptal sebepleri sınırlı şekilde sayılmıştır. Ancak bazen bu iptal sebeplerinin faklı şekillerde yorumlandığı görülmüştür. İptal sebeplerinin geniş yorumlanması hakem kararlarının iptal olasılığını orantısız şekilde arttıracaktır. Bu durum alternatif uyuşmazlık çözüm yolu olan tahkimin güvenirliğine zarar verdiği gibi uzun, meşakkatli ve masraflı tahkim yargılama sürecini de boşa çıkaracaktır. Ancak, iptal sebeplerin adaletsizliğe yol açacak şekilde çok dar yorumlanması da keyfiliğe, tutarsızlığa ve tarafların istemediği sonuçlara yol açacaktır. Bu çerçevede Türk kanunları dahil çeşitli ülkelerdeki kanunları ve mahkeme uygulamalarını dikkate alarak kanımızca iptal sebepleri bakımından doğru yaklaşımları ortaya koymaya çalışacağız. Çalışmamız üç bölümden oluşmaktadır. İlk bölümde milletlerarası tahkime ilişkin genel bilgiler, yabancı hakem kararlarının tabiiyetinin belirlenmesi ve iptal davasına konu olabilecek yabancı hakem kararlarının türleri yer almaktadır. Bunun devamında, ikinci bölümde, çeşitli ülkelerin tahkime ilişkin kanunları, tahkime ilişkin milletlerarası literatürde kabul gören hukuki metinleri de dikkate alınarak iptal sebepleri ortaya konulacaktır. Aynı zamanda, konu ile ilgili doktrindeki görüşlere yer verilerek çeşitli ülkelerde verilen mahkeme kararları çerçevesinde iptal sebeplerine ilişkin yaklaşımlara ver verilecektir. Çalışmamızın üçüncü ve son bölümünde ise iptal davasının tarafları, iptal davasında görevli ve yetkili mahkeme ve iptal davasından feragat konuları Türk hukuku ve karşılaştırmalı hukuk bakımından incelenmeye çalışılmaktadır. Along with the globalization of trade, arbitration has become more preferred by individuals, companies and states than state courts in resolving international disputes. One of the most important reasons for this preference is that the arbitral awards given after the arbitration proceedings are final and binding, just as the court decisions. However, the party rendered against the award may consider it unjust. In this context, in order for the arbitral awards to be audited by the state courts, "annulment case" is designed as a legal remedy in almost all national legal systems. The party requesting annulment may file an action for annulment in the court of the place of arbitration if there are certain reasons. The purpose of the party requesting annulment against the arbitral award is to invalidate some or all of the decision and to prevent its execution. Although the reasons for annulment are limited and similar in many legal systems, the interpretation of these reasons is of great importance. A broad interpretation of the grounds for annulment will disproportionately increase the possibility of annulment of arbitral awards. This situation will not only harm the reliability of arbitration, which is an alternative dispute resolution method, but will also nullify the long, laboursome and costly arbitration proceedings. On the other hand, much narrower interpretation of the grounds for annulment in a way that leads to injustice may lead to arbitrariness and inconsistency, as well as result in undesirable results by the parties. Considering these, we will try to put forward approaches that can be consistent in terms of the grounds for annulment, taking into account the laws and court practices in various countries, including Turkish laws. This study consists of three parts. In the first part, general information about international arbitration, determination of the nationality of foreign arbitral awards and types of foreign arbitral awards that may be subject to annulment proceedings are included. Following this, in the second part, the reasons for annulment will be presented considering the arbitration laws of various countries and the internationally accepted legal texts on arbitration. At the same time, we try to put forward the approaches regarding the reasons for annulment within the framework of the court decisions given in various countries by giving place to the opinions in the doctrine on the subject. In the third and final part of our study, the parties of the annulment case, the competent court in charge of the annulment case and the waiver of the annulment case are to be examined in terms of Turkish law and comparative law.

Arabuluculuk tarafların tarafsız bir üçüncü bir kişinin yardımı ile ihtilaflarını çözmeye yardımcı olması olarak tanımlanabilir. Türkiye'de özel hukuktan doğan ve tarafların üzerinde serbestçe tasarruf edebilecekleri uyuşmazlıkların arabuluculuk ile çözümüne ilişkin 6325 sayılı Hukuk Uyuşmazlıklarında Arabuluculuk Kanunu'nun 2013 yılında kabulü ile arabuluculuk uygulamasına geçilmiştir. 7036 sayılı İş Mahkemeleri Kanunu ile 2018 yılı itibariyle dava şartı arabuluculuk kavramı Türk hukuk literatürüne girmiştir. 7036 sayılı İş Mahkemeleri Kanunu md.3 uyarınca kanuna, bireysel iş sözleşmesine, toplu iş sözleşmesine dayanan alacak, tazminat veya işe iade talebi ile açılan davalarda arabuluculuğa başvurulması dava şartıdır. İtalya, Almanya ve ABD'nin bazı eyaletlerinde iş hukukunda dava şartı arabuluculuk uygulaması yoktur. İngiltere'de iş mahkemelerine başvurmak için önce ACAS isimli kuruma başvurmak gerekir. ABD 'de ise iş ilişkilerindeki ayrımcılık iddiaları öncelikle EEOC'de görülmektedir. Bireysel İş Hukukunda Arabuluculuk başlıklı doktora tezi çalışmamız dört bölümden oluşmaktadır. Çalışmanın birinci bölümünde alternatif uyuşmazlık çözüm yöntemleri kavramı ve belli başlı alternatif uyuşmazlık yöntemleri irdelenerek incelenmiş, ikinci bölümde arabuluculuk kurumu, amacı, prensipleri, türleri, arabulucunun hak ve yükümlülükleri, arabulucu ve arabuluculuk sözleşmelerinin hukuki mahiyeti ve arabuluculuk etiği gibi konular çalışılmıştır. Mukayeseli İş Hukukunda Arabuluculuk başlıklı üçüncü bölümde, arabuluculuğun anavatanı olan Amerika Birleşik Devletleri, Birleşik Krallık gibi Anglo Sakson sistemindeki devletlerde, İtalya, Almanya, Fransa gibi Roma Cermen sistemindeki devletlerde ve Avrupa Birliği müktesabatında arabuluculuğun nasıl düzenlendiği ve son olarak dördüncü bölüm olan Türk İş Hukukunda Arabuluculuk başlığı altında, dava şartı arabuluculuk kavramına ilişkin konular yargı kararları da işlenerek ayrıntılı olarak irdelenmiştir. Mediation can be defined as helping parties resolve their disputes with the help of a third party. With the adoption of the Law No. 6325 on Mediation in Civil Disputes in 2013, mediation has been implemented regarding the resolution of disputes arising from private law and on which the parties can freely dispose of. As of 2018, with the adoption of the Labor Courts Law numbered 7036 the concept of mediation as a cause of action in employment disputes litigation introduced in our legal literature. Pursuant to Article 3 of Labor Courts Law numbered 7036, lawsuits filed with the demand for receivables, compensation or reemployment based on the law, individual employment contract, collective bargaining agreement are subject to mediation as a cause of action. In Italy and Germany mediation in employment disputes does not exist. In England, in order to apply to the labor courts, firstly it must be applied to ACAS. In the United States of America, for discriminatory allegations in the employment relation firstly EEOC must be addressed. The doctoral thesis titled Mediation in Individual Employment Law consists of four parts. In the first part of the study, the concept of the alternative dispute resolution methods is investigated by examining the main alternative dispute methods, in the second part, the mediation institution, its purpose, principles, types, rights and responsibilities of the mediator, the legal nature of the mediator and mediation agreemets and mediation ethics are studied. In the third part titled Mediation in Comparative Employment Law, the Anglo-Saxon countries such as the United States of America and the United Kingdom, which are the homeland of mediation, in the Roman Germanic system states such as Italy, Germany France and in European Union legal system are explained and lastly under the title of Mediation in Turkish Employment Law, which is the fourth part, the issues related to the concept of mediation as a cause of action are also discussed in detail adding judicial decisions.

It is nowadays generally accepted that international commercial arbitration is the most popular method of resolving international disputes between commercial parties. This popularity is the cumulative result of many advantages that international commercial arbitration offers to the parties. It is suggested in the literature that one of these advantages is the freedom of parties and the resulting procedural flexibility. In virtue of this principle, the parties have the opportunity to establish a specific method of adjudication adapted to the nature of their dispute. This opportunity is provided by the fact that the arbitration regulations do not include detailed rules on the collection of evidence, thus leaving the parties and the arbitrators' range of motion. Therefore, we consider that this procedural flexibility has emerged as a possibility obtained at the expense of certainty in international commercial arbitration proceedings. This uncertainty is to such an extent that it also warrants the question as to whether there is an applicable law to take evidence in international commercial arbitration proceedings. Such procedural flexibility afforded to the parties, however, comes at a price of uncertainty with respect to arbitral procedure. International commercial arbitration developed as a reaction to the failings of proceedings in domestic courts, which were subject to detailed rules of evidence. Thus, the consensus in the arbitration community is that party freedom and the procedural flexibility that comes with it are fundamental attributes of arbitration. Although this presumption is theoretically correct; in other words, the parties are indeed able to craft such a procedure that would perfectly fit for adjudication of their disputes, mostly it does not reflect the practical reality. In practice, when parties are negotiating the terms of an agreement to govern their business relationship, they generally tend to avoid discussions as to what will happen if things go wrong. As a matter of fact, according to our practice experiences, when one of the parties' legal counsel tries to address such hypothetical scenarios, the parties generally prefer to suppress such "negative thoughts" and refuse to make in-depth discussions as to how a possible dispute is to be handled. Hereby, this leaves open the question of the procedure to be followed in arbitration proceedings in case of potential disputes. As a result, the provisions on how to resolve disputes that may arise between the parties, in other words, the "dispute resolution" provisions, are left to the very end of the negotiations and passed over in a few sentences. When the relationship between the parties becomes truly strained and a dispute comes to an unavoidable stage, it becomes even less likely that the parties will agree on how to gather evidence on the dispute in question. In a such situation, any suggestions made by one party regarding the procedure for the taking of evidence will be viewed with suspicion by the other party. In an environment of suspicion and animosity, it is often unrealistic to expect productive negotiations to take place on procedural matters. As a result, although the parties have a wide range of motions to make agreements regarding the method of collecting evidence in arbitration proceedings, they are often unable to exercise this authority in practice. As the parties are not exercising their rule-making powers, this important task, which is decisive for the resolution of the dispute, shifts to the arbitrators. Therefore, in our opinion, it would not be a wrong assessment to say that the freedom of the parties has turned into the freedom of the arbitrator in practice. Once appointed, arbitrators have to decide on many issues with respect to the taking of evidence as rules applicable to arbitration are generally silent as to these matters. Although arbitrators have the opportunity to be guided by some non-binding rules, such as the IBA Rules and the Prague Rules, which are considered to be effective and instructive in the arbitration community, they are ultimately left to make their assessments and reach an award based on their judgment. The above-mentioned non-binding rules can undoubtedly assist arbitral tribunals to a certain extent with regard to the taking of evidence. However, it is not possible to say that these rules are enforceable guidelines that can be blindly followed by arbitral tribunals. A closer look at these rules reveals that they leave many issues to the discretion of the arbitral tribunals. Of course, any decision regarding the taking of evidence in international commercial arbitration is already within the discretion of the arbitral tribunals, even in the absence of these rules. Therefore, these provisions, which have been drafted to allow the arbitral tribunals to decide as they see fit, are no more than general guidance on how to exercise their discretion. For these reasons, even if the parties have agreed on the application of these non-binding rules, the fact remains that the collection and evaluation of evidence are still left to the discretion of the arbitral tribunals. This study takes an inductive approach by analyzing the normative and non-binding rules of law applicable to evidence in international commercial arbitration. Firstly, this study examines whether there is a body of rules that can be characterized as the law of evidence in international commercial arbitration. It is determined that there is a law of evidence in international commercial arbitration; however, its content is rather composed of general principles. After determining that these rules have normative value, it is examined how and to what extent these general principles are concretized in terms of the types of evidence used in international commercial arbitration. Although the degree of concretization of these principles varies according to the types of evidence, as a general characteristic, it is determined that arbitral tribunals are left with a very wide discretionary power. It is concluded that arbitral tribunals have a wide latitude of action with respect to the submission of documents, the presentation of witness testimony, the use of expert testimony, the use of discovery and the extent of the res judicata effect of a prior award. Subsequently, the rules on the admissibility and evaluation of evidence are analyzed and it is concluded that the arbitral tribunals have wide discretion in international commercial arbitration, as in other matters relating to evidence and even the discretion regarding the evaluation of evidence is relatively wider. Since it is difficult to review the discretionary power exercised in these matters, it is observed that the arbitral tribunals' decisions on evidentiary issues fall outside the scope of judicial review. This leads to a further blurring of the already grey evidentiary issues in international commercial arbitration proceedings. This is because it is not possible to determine the extent to which the arbitral tribunal has relied on evidence that ostensibly played a role during the proceedings. In the last instance, although the arbitrators' discretionary powers are limited by general principles such as due process and opportunity to be heard, the limits of such discretionary powers are, generally speaking, somewhat blurred as these are general principles. Another issue is that arbitral tribunals are often subject to pressure from the parties when making their decisions on the taking of evidence during the arbitral proceedings. The parties are more interested in being the winner of the concrete proceedings than in the proper conduct of the proceedings in accordance with the law, procedure and rules. In this sense, a party whose request for evidence is likely to be rejected will often argue that the arbitral tribunal's decision violates the principle of a fair trial, even if this is not the case. It is in these circumstances that arbitral tribunals must strike a balance between a fair trial and an efficient trial and make appropriate decisions on evidentiary issues. If arbitral tribunals emphasize procedural efficiency and defer to the parties' presentation of their claims and defences, this may not in itself constitute an obstacle to legally correct decisions. However, this would violate the fundamental procedural safeguards of the participants in the proceedings and may even lead to arbitration proceedings becoming a mechanism for arbitrary and haphazard decision-making. If the opposite approach is taken, in other words, if the priority is to uncover the material truth at all costs and the procedural economy is put on the back burner, this will result in costly and protracted proceedings that will far exceed the limits of reasonableness. Given the limited scope of the guidelines available to arbitrators on the collection and evaluation of evidence, striking this balance is not an easy task. Therefore, it is quite understandable that arbitral tribunals, when deciding on evidentiary issues, may prefer the safer route and give precedence to claims of breach of the principle of a fair trial, even at the expense of the efficiency of the proceedings. Additionally, the confidential nature of the international commercial arbitral proceedings also amplifies the problem. As a result of this principle, the available knowledge as to the practice of arbitration becomes limited to anecdotal stories as to what has happened in certain individual international commercial arbitration proceedings. The arbitrators do not have sufficient opportunity to know about how their colleagues have dealt with certain issues that may have similarities with the issues that they have been trying to solve. In conclusion, in light of the foregoing, since the arbitral tribunals are the rule-makers of arbitration proceedings, the extent to which arbitration proceedings will function correctly and efficiently depends on the experience of the arbitral tribunals and their knowledge of the law, procedure and rules. Basing a correct and efficient arbitration procedure solely on the initiative of experienced arbitrators reduces the 'certainty' of the arbitral procedure. In the face of this situation, it may be tempting to argue that it is inappropriate for arbitrators to have so much freedom and that the rules applicable to arbitral proceedings should be revised to be more detailed. Indeed, there are those who argue that such a change should take place. In the final analysis, a good system should be able to function well regardless of how qualified (or unqualified) its participants are. It is obvious that an argument that sees detailed procedural rules as a remedy for this would contradict the historical development of arbitration and therefore would not be accepted by the international arbitration community. Likewise, from the other side of the coin, it could be argued that detailed procedural rules that are not appropriate to the nature of the individual dispute would prevent qualified and experienced arbitral tribunals from formulating rules that are appropriate to the resolution of the dispute in question, and that the hands of arbitral tribunals may be tied in this way. Although it may be argued that these counter-arguments are equally justified, they do not negate the fact that certainty should be ensured in international commercial arbitration proceedings. Therefore, this suggests that it may be appropriate to resort to alternative methods to ensure certainty. Indeed, it would be a mistake to assume that the only way to achieve certainty is through a detailed set of rules, as we, as legal practitioners in the Continental European legal system, are accustomed to. In the countries subject to the Common Law system, many branches of law do not have such a detailed set of rules and therefore it is not possible to claim that these legal systems lack certainty. Especially in the common law, certainty is provided by case law. If the same logic were to be applied to international commercial arbitration proceedings, it would mean that making information on arbitration proceedings more accessible could help to achieve the goal of certainty. In recent years, there have been some initiatives recognizing the benefits of this approach. While arbitral tribunals are under no obligation to follow the decisions of other arbitral tribunals, having the opportunity to see that there is a consistent pattern of decisions on a particular issue would undoubtedly provide valuable guidance for arbitral tribunals. As the pool of information available to arbitral tribunals and the parties expands, it is obvious that the grey areas regarding evidence in international commercial arbitration will diminish over time. In this way, it will be possible to achieve greater certainty without undermining the fundamental values of the arbitral procedure. Reducing the uncertainty caused by procedural flexibility on procedural certainty in this way will contribute significantly to the development of international commercial arbitration.

Qu’il soit institutionnel ou adhoc, L’arbitrage est vu comme un mode de règlement des litiges qui a vocation à se dérouler, de la requête initiale à la sentence finale, sans l’intervention du juge étatique. Il arrive, cependant que, ce juge soit amené à intervenir dans le processus arbitral, pour une raison ou pour une autre. On a pu ainsi dire qu’il n’y a pas de bon arbitrage sans un bon juge. Bien que l’intervention du juge étatique doivent rester exceptionnelle en matière d’arbitrage, il importe que ledit juge soit identifié, d’autant qu’il n’est pas le mena selon la phase à laquelle il intervient et peut varier d’une organisation judiciaire à une autre.

Aujourd'hui plus qu'hier, la médiation suscite l’intérêt tant des chercheurs, des praticiens, que des politiques. Cet intérêt se matérialise notamment par les différents cadres juridiques dont elle bénéficie dans plusieurs législations. Afin de promouvoir la médiation au sein de ses États membres, L’Organisation pour l’Harmonisation en Afrique du Droit des Affaires (OHADA) a adopté le 23 novembre 2017 un Acte Uniforme relatif à la Médiation (AUM). Après avoir adopté depuis plus de deux décennies un Acte uniforme sur l’arbitrage, l’organisation régionale confirme sa volonté de promouvoir les modes alternatifs de règlement de conflits dans le domaine du droit des affaires. Cependant, l’AUM est un instrument juridique particulier attendu qu'il est le premier de son genre à s’appliquer également aux domaines non encore régis par le droit OHADA. Toutefois, si la médiation tend à se développer de plus en plus, il convient de prendre garde à ce que cette évolution, notamment en ce qui concerne son encadrement légal, ne conduise pas à sa dénaturation. Voilà l’un des défis auquel est également soumis le législateur OHADA.