Bibliographie sélective OHADA

Une bonne partie de la doctrine juridique semble admettre le contrat de commerce international comme source du droit. Pourtant, plusieurs éléments pertinents intrinsèques et même extrinsèques au contrat de commerce international conduisent à contester sa qualité de source du droit. En effet, s’il est possible de retenir qu’il crée des normes, celles-ci sont en opposition avec les critères habituels et les spécificités de la loi. En recherchant des critères d’acceptabilité auprès de la jurisprudence, l’arrimage reste difficile notamment en raison de ce que les parties se tourneront souvent vers une juridiction arbitrale qui saura leur garantir la non-diffusion du litige et du contrat ; une recherche de confidentialité et de secret qui n’est pas de nature à susciter la naissance d’une force créatrice du droit. Le rôle d’influenceur de la doctrine s’en voit ainsi compromis puisqu’il faut que le contrat établi soit connu pour que la doctrine veuille, par son influence toucher le législateur à ce propos. Bref, dans l’ordre juridique interne, le contrat de commerce international, est contesté en tant que source du droit. La lex mercatoria ne semble pas non plus porter un meilleur écho à la thèse du contrat de commerce international comme source du droit. D’ailleurs, de nombreuses controverses remettent en cause sa qualité d’ordre juridique. Et si les pratiques contractuelles internationales organisées ou relativement spontanées sont d’une grande richesse inventive, elles ne semblent pas suffisantes pour alimenter une vraie théorie des sources mercatiques. La juridicité de la lex mercatoria étant contestée, il n’est possible d’y trouver une source du droit que dans l’hypothèse d’une juridicité propre à la lex mercatoria. Et l’émancipation de la lex mercatoria par rapport à l’ordre juridique national et international semble se confirmer.

This chapter deals with the principle of direct effect as applied in European Union law and explores its suitability in the enforcement of African Union (AU) legal instruments, notably those setting up the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA). What motivates the issue of direct effect is the noted reticence of African countries to litigate trade matters between themselves despite the existence of provisions of regional trade treaties creating courts of justice which give standing to Member States. Therefore, it surveys the avenues through which natural and legal persons can uphold their rights stemming from AfCFTA treaties thus contributing to treaty interpretation and increasing security and predictability. Currently, the AfCFTA Dispute Settlement Protocol, modelled after the WTO, does not allow such a possibility, contrary to rights acquired by natural and legal persons before some African Regional Economic Communities (RECs) courts. Nevertheless, this chapter finds that carving out access of natural and legal persons to AfCFTA proceedings may not always work as intended since there are other ways to bypass these obstacles. These loopholes could be the gateway through which direct effect will develop and become a principle of AU law broadly speaking. These gaps further complement this chapter’s suggestions to explore amending the AfCFTA legal instruments, even though its dispute settlement system is yet to be tested, in order to match the standing that natural and legal persons have acquired under the RECs, which, in fine, are building blocs towards achieving the AfCFTA and, eventually, the African Economic Community.

In the more recent decades, international investment law (“iil”) and arbitration have been going through a process of recalibration prompted by both the intensification of cross-border capital flows and the States’ growing concerns over the potential restraints iil may impose upon the pursuit of public interests. The present contribution will pay attention to a specific feature that can be observed within these developments, i.e. the role played by soft law in investment arbitration and, more generally, under iil, also with a view to assessing the impact on the formation of binding international law of instruments formally devoid of normative force within the international legal order. After an introduction (Section 1), the contribution is articulated into four sections. Section 2 will first define the field of investigation. The case law of investment tribunals and the treaty practice under the more recent iia s will be then explored as to the reliance on soft law instruments for the purposes of settling procedural (Section 3) and substantive issues (Section 4). Some final remarks will close (Section 5).

The UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration provides for the extension of the mandate of the arbitral tribunal post issuance of the final award for the issuance of correction, interpretation, additional award, and remittance of the award back to the arbitral tribunal to remove grounds for challenging the award. Using a doctrinal approach, this paper examines the deviations of the national laws of adopting jurisdictions from the Model Law in regards to this extended mandate, and evaluates the improvements and drawbacks in these deviations. Mainly, the findings of this paper are that, of the many deviations, the positive changes are those that provide comfortable and lenient default provisions for the benefit of inexperienced parties, and since correction, interpretation, additional award, and remittance are useful provisions that are designed to help self-rectify the arbitral process, without adversely delaying it, then the changes that increase the efficacy of these provisions are welcomed. On the other hand, unnecessary deviations are seen as drawbacks that hinder the harmonization of national arbitration laws aimed at by the Model Law. The adopting jurisdictions shall be limited to those acknowledged as such by the UNCITRAL.

Le principe de proportionnalité a été récemment reconnu dans les traités et les accords internationaux du commerce et des investissements avec l’État. Cependant, peu d'études se concentrent sur la nature juridique, le contenu, la portée et les fonctions de ce principe dans le droit économique international. Cette thèse présente une analyse actuelle et détaillée sur ces questions.

The sub-Saharan African region is characterized by a high relative degree of openness to trade. The region is also identified with increased inflows of foreign investments with no significant welfare improvement. Economic development emphasizes that the lack of domestic investment in the developing economies could be boosted by trade openness and inflow of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) for impactful enhancement of capital formation. In this article, the impact of trade openness and foreign capital inflow on economic welfare was examined on a sub-regional analysis for sub-Saharan Africa. The study also appraised the effect of openness to trade and FDI inflow on the region's economic welfare. The data for 30 countries from 2000 to 2018 were collected and analyzed, with the Generalized Least Square (GLS) technique to fit the model developed. The study showed that openness to trade has a significant impact on economic welfare for all sub-Saharan Africa regions, while FDI is only significant for the Western sub-region. Hence, the study recommends that the government of the countries in the sub-Saharan Africa region should boost trade openness to enhance efficiency in productivity, and improve industrial development.

In this essay, we describe the overlapping phenomena of new legal hubs (NLHs), international commercial courts, and arbitral courts. We survey their impact on the law and geopolitics of international commercial dispute resolution, identifying key issues these new dispute resolution institutions raise. While the rise of international commercial courts spans authoritarian and liberal states, Western and Asian states, common law and civil law traditions, it also highlights and builds upon regional differences. We question the assumption that the establishment of new courts is always consistent with an increase in the rule of law, particularly in non-democratic states. We close with thoughts about the potential influence and future role of these institutions. Some of the procedural innovations discussed here may lead to shifts in international commercial dispute resolution for years to come, but the question of whether there is sufficient demand for these new institutions lingers.