Bibliographie sélective OHADA

Le droit maritime fait partie du droit des affaires qui est le domaine de compétence matérielle de l’OHADA. Or, on constate à ce jour qu’il ne fait l’objet d’aucun acte uniforme adopté ou en préparation. Dans la mesure où la mission de l’OHADA est de juguler l’insécurité juridique et judiciaire liée aux conflits de lois en dotant ses états membres de règles communes simples, modernes et adaptées à leurs réalités économiques, on peut penser que s’il n’y a pas d’acte uniforme relatif au droit maritime, c’est parce que cela n’est pas nécessaire. Or, il n’en est rien. C’est ce que démontre cette thèse afin d’attirer l’attention des décideurs de l’espace OHADA sur la nécessité d’intégrer le droit maritime dans le processus d’uniformisation du droit des affaires. Aussi, les disparités des législations maritimes de l’espace OHADA, les conflits de lois qui en résultent et la complexité juridique et judiciaire liée à la coexistence du droit maritime avec le droit uniforme sont exposés les uns après les autres. Enfin et dans la perspective de l’uniformisation du droit maritime, quelques brèves propositions sont avancées dans la conclusion.

Sovereign rights in Exclusive economic zones and Continental shelves are functionally limited to the economic exploitation of these zones. Moreover, in the case of disputed maritime zones these sovereign rights are neither exclusive nor necessarily constant. Nevertheless, states are still expected to provide the investments established in these zones the same treatment they should provide in their territories where they exercise full and constant sovereignty. If a host state agrees to the establishment of an investment in a maritime zone that become later contested, do the occurrence of the contestation and the hazards arising from such contestation relief the host state from its contractual and treaty obligations toward the investment by virtue of the force majeure concept. This paper argues that a traditional interpretation of the force majeure concept in respect of investment agreements and contracts, hampers states ability to de-escalate their maritime disputes, diminishes its capacity to conclude delimitation agreements and reduces the promotion of the UNCLOS III as well as its mechanisms for disputes settlement. It proposes a contextualist interpretation of the force majeure concept that is adapted to the exploitation of disputed maritime zones and states obligations under the international law of the sea. First, it examines the concept of force majeure as a doc-trinal hypothesis and its applications in international contracts and international in-vestment agreements. Second, it analyzes the legal act of maritime contestation as a force majeure event according to the possible interpretations of the concept of “force majeure”. Finally, it examines the recurrent legal implications susceptible of arising out of a contestation; provisional orders and unfavorable delimitation and their qualifica-tion as a force majeure event in the realm of investment agreements and contract.

Maritime transport is essential to the world’s economy and maritime arbitration plays a crucial role in maritime dispute resolution. Nowadays, many coastal jurisdictions have set up their own maritime arbitration institutions such as those in the US, the UK, Germany, Australia, China, Japan, Hong Kong, and Singapore. Building a national world-advanced maritime arbitration system as soon as possible to suit China’s rapid developments in shipping and international trading does not permit of any delay. How should China improve her laws, rules and institutions, including those for the enforcement of maritime arbitration awards, having regard to leading international maritime arbitration systems? It is posited that selective adaptation from the successful experience of other maritime arbitration systems is the most convenient and effective way to achieve such a goal. This adaptation will follow from a comprehensive and comparative study of the maritime arbitration laws, rules and the maritime arbitration institutions, including the laws relating to the enforcement of maritime arbitration awards, from these main global maritime arbitration centres in order to make China’s maritime arbitration more competitive at the international level. This thesis does not purport to cover every research field relating to maritime arbitration. Instead, as previously stated, it will focus only on the comparative study of some selected key issues of international commercial arbitration among the selected jurisdictions. A comprehensive study of international commercial arbitration or international maritime law is not the subject of this thesis. It should be noted further that this research basically concentrates on the practical problems of maritime arbitration practices, rather than taking an overly theoretical approach. The thesis selects the UK, the US, Singapore and Hong Kong as the target jurisdictions for comparison. Through selective comparative analysis of the key issues of maritime arbitration systems in the selected jurisdictions, which are internationally recognised as significant by many arbitration scholars, this thesis proposes that all these issues could conveniently be categorised into four key criteria; namely, fairness, confidentiality, efficiency and enforceability. It follows that the adaptations of the Chinese maritime arbitration system should mainly focus on these four criteria, as these are the most critical factors for the development of Chinese maritime arbitration system. Moreover, these four criteria should also have significance for other underdeveloped maritime arbitration systems. Also, based on these four key criteria, the thesis provides some specific suggestions on how the Chinese maritime arbitration system can be adapted to reflect other selected jurisdictions in the respects of some key issues of international commercial arbitration.