INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION LAW

International Arbitration Law

International Arbitration Law

Introduction

Problems related to the formation of the arbitration agreement are: the ability and power, the existence and validity of consent, legality of the commitment to arbitration, and the form and proof of the arbitration agreement. In terms of capacity and power, the detour through the conflict is still relevant in distinguishing between the ability of individuals (national law) and legal (law of the seat or the incorporation into the rights of Common Law) power (law of its source, in the presence of intermediaries. The Hague March, Autonomy Act or law if the establishment or habitual residence of the intermediary in principle); law governs the operation of the corporation in the presence of society. But the discrepancy that can produce conflicts of law internationally is such that today we tend to stick to substantive rules. As for capacity, the principle of validity of the right to appear before the arbitral tribunal companies do not encounter any obstacle; individuals are deemed capable of doing the same when they are engaged in an occupation; as in power, the practice of arbitration, the English rights and community are consistent with a validity of the power of a corporation for a person to create, by virtue of practice and principles (good faith). But the method is not foolproof.

It prefers to use as a patch. Regarding to consent; it must verify its existence by way of interpretation. Despite the principle of competence, the appellate court is not bound to accept the settlement by arbitration, when it receives an application for cancellation or reversal of the judge's order of for enforcement. In a case known as that of the "plateau of the Pyramids” the Court of Cassation ruled that "if the mission of the Court of Appeal, seized under Articles and NCPC, is confined to examining vices listed in these texts, no limitation is made to the power of this court to look at law or in fact all elements concerning the defects in question, in particular, it must interpret the contract to appreciate it even if the arbitrator ruled without an arbitration agreement.” Even before the Court of Cassation quashed the appeal decision which required a detour to the arbitrators by the law of the contract (Arc Into, 2001).

General principles are used: the interpretation of good faith, the principle of effectiveness based section of the Civil Code and prompting officials to make sense of what the called "pathological clauses" (contradictory or ineffective, pointing to an arbitration institution is not precise enough or nonexistent or even white-clause does not specify the procedures for appointing referees, at the foot of the letter). Other principles of interpretation are often developed without convincing though. Furthermore the terms "pathological", it was necessary to solve the problems inherent with the terms mixed and combined (giving responsibility to both the judge and arbitration); arbitral practice and jurisprudence on this point are in favour habitability of the dispute, because if they had intended to give jurisdiction as ...