Search results

This paper explores the experience of “Shari’a” as non-state law in the English courts through a historical analysis of past Islamic finance dispute resolutions (IFDRs). This paper aims to propose a conceivable scenario relating to the law applicable in international commercial contracts in the English courts with the emergence of the Hague Principles 2015.

This paper addresses several issues that have been raised in English case law: doubts about the legal nature of “Shari’a” as non-state law; the limits placed on freedom of choice of “Shari’a” law by the application of a single legal system; and the distinction between application of law and incorporation by reference of “Shari’a” in IFDRs. The paper then analyses the conformity of “Shari’a” with the provisions now used to resolve Islamic finance disputes (trade and investment) in the English courts, using an empirical analysis of The Accounting and Auditing Organization for Islamic Financial Institutions standards.

The paper provides that, in theory, “Shari’a” standards could play a significant role in IFDRs after Brexit, even though a gap persists in practice because the Hague Principles 2015 have not yet been adopted by the English legal system.

The study focuses on the English courts and shows how the IFDRs could be resolved with the emergence of Hague Principles 2015 in the post-Brexit era.

To the best of the author’s knowledge, this paper appears to be the first paper to provide a conceivable scenario relating to the future of the IFDRs in the English courts.

Party autonomy is a core tenet of the arbitral process which bestows certain contractual freedoms upon the disputing parties. This paper aims to utilise both doctrinal analysis and theoretical conceptualisation to examine the principle of party autonomy in international commercial arbitration. It examines the extent to which certain exceptions to this principle, such as public policy and natural justice, where autonomy impedes on matters of justice and delocalisation, have restricted the principle in practice.

Party autonomy is a core tenet of the arbitral process, which bestows certain contractual freedoms upon the disputing parties. However, in spite of its appeal as an unfettered right, it has been challenged by an array of exceptions that have rendered it largely unqualified in international commercial arbitration. This paper utilises both doctrinal analysis and theoretical conceptualisation to examine the principle of party autonomy in international commercial arbitration. It examines the extent to which certain exceptions to this principle, such as public policy and natural justice, where autonomy impedes on matters of justice and delocalisation, have restricted the principle in practice. Furthermore, approaches to party autonomy in two distinct legal systems, the Common law system in England and Sharia law in Saudi Arabia, are examined to ascertain the extent to which party autonomy has been hindered by these exceptions.

Arbitration continued to grow throughout the forgone centuries, with key philosophers, such as Aristotle, advocating the advantages of arbitration over litigation. In addition, the emergence of party autonomy occurred in the sixteenth century, with Dumoulin proposing that the parties’ will in contracts is sovereign. Thus, party autonomy began to develop into a significant aspect of contract law, which plays a pivotal role in arbitration. This is because the principle has its roots in the autonomous will of the parties to conduct the arbitral process as they wish. The paper explored the debate regarding party autonomy and its development into the contemporary world of arbitration. It examined its origins and how it has grown into the core fabric of arbitration today. Emphasis was provided in relation to the nature of the principle, which was highly relevant to the debate. This is because it is vital to appreciate issues such as freedom of contract to have a deeper insight into the principle and what it entails. The limitations of party autonomy were extensively examined, and the public policy exception was found to construe narrowly by a vast number of States. As a result, it was suggested that the exception should be more than merely a theoretical defence. Thus, it should be exercised where enforcement of an arbitral award would disregard unjust or improper results. Furthermore, the natural justice principle was observed as a double-edged sword that protected the parties in the arbitral process. However, it also hampered the effectiveness of party autonomy by impeding upon the parties’ freedom to contract, which ultimately limited the principle. Thus, it is concluded that the principle of party autonomy is not absolute. While it would be desirable if it was, certain issues cannot be resolved so easily. Limitations to party autonomy have existed since its inception and are most likely to continue. Although this is not the ideal situation for proponents of autonomy, it nevertheless appears to be the case. However, it is proposed that limitations to party autonomy should be chipped away as much as possible. This would enable the autonomy of the parties to be upheld at a much higher rate.

This paper utilises both doctrinal analysis and theoretical conceptualisation to examine the principle of party autonomy in international commercial arbitration. Secondary sources were also used.

This is the first of two papers which examine whether Arab securities regulations can be the subject of a methodological study in comparative securities regulation, especially with reference to EU regulations. Little is known about Arab securities regulation in European academic discourse on financial regulation. Needless to say, the sociopolitical dynamics of Shari'a (Islamic law) have occasionally been decontextualised by Western researchers in a manner that has often resulted in obfuscating a balanced projection of Shari'a's juridical impact. In order, therefore, to provide a fuller analysis, this first paper starts by explaining the importance of examining Shari'a juridically in the broader context of commercial legislation, as despite the relatively stable regulatory status quo, Shari'a still poses juridical risks to imported Western legal concepts. It also examines Shari'a's juridical impact on Jordan, Kuwait and Oman. The second paper, which will appear in a future issue of the Journal, addresses the specific juridical impact of Shari'a on capital markets, before looking at its impact on capital market laws of Jordan, Kuwait and Oman. In order to provide an insight into existing Arab securities regulations, it then moves to survey the securities and company laws in the aforementioned countries. The discussion also includes a brief examination of market conditions, especially the early factors that accompanied the genesis of such Arab securities markets, notably in Kuwait. The second paper concludes by addressing the question of the suitability of the case study Arab markets to comparative studies in EU securities regulation. It explains in the process why the European experience is relevant (particularly in light of the many EU—Arab association agreements due to take effect from 2010, together with EU ‘harmonisation’, ‘minimum standards’, and ‘single Passport’ regulatory concepts).

In this article the author proposes to traverse various views on money in order to contend that while antiquated notions of its materiality continue to bedevil English legal structures, the law will fail to keep up with current commercial practices, and, equally seriously, fail to detect, prevent or punish coming criminal practices as well. The thrust of the argument is that how money is perceived, and what is conceived of as constituting it, together determine how laws deal with the cultural and commercial need for consensus on what might function as a medium of exchange and a store of value. As a consequence, if the perception of money is locked into its historically contingent aspects, legal structures will become increasingly marginalised by the superior resources and sophistication of contemporary organised crime.

This study aims to provides the insights on the advantages and disadvantages of international franchising and licensing from the perspectives of legal and business considerations in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC).

Using a quantitative research approach, the authors conducted a survey with 150 business owners and franchisees in the GCC and analyzed the data using descriptive statistics, structural equation modeling and frequency analysis.

The findings reveal that while international franchising and licensing offer significant benefits for business expansion and revenue growth, they also pose risks related to legal compliance, cultural differences and intellectual property protection. Indeed, the results of this study provide valuable insights into the advantages and disadvantages of international franchising and licensing in the GCC from both legal and business perspectives.

There is limited research on the legal and business perspectives of international franchising and licensing in the GCC. This study contributes to the literature by providing a comprehensive analysis of the legal and business perspectives of international franchising and licensing in the GCC.

This paper examines comparative aspects of Arab securities regulation. It provides a general introduction, overviews the aims of securities regulation and the UK regulatory framework, and outlines the obstacles facing equity financing under Shari'a and hindrances to effective Arab securities regulation. It accounts for the major macroeconomic reasons which have enhanced interest in Arab securities markets, examines lack of Arab rules on fraud, insider dealing and possible contractual remedies. It concludes with a case study shedding light on the term ‘securities’ as understood by Article 3 of the 1997 Jordanian Securities Act.

This paper aims to examine the extent to which these reforms address the limitations of Saudi Arabia’s previous investment framework. Long viewed as a hostile environment in which to do business, the Saudi Government has enacted a broad sweep of measures aimed at restoring investor confidence in central aspects of the country’s evolving private law framework.

This paper offers a timely assessment of the raft of foreign investment reforms, both legislative and regulatory, that have been introduced in Saudi Arabia over the last decade.

The paper will proceed by outlining the perceived failings of the old investment regime before going on to reforms.

It will consider the remaining obstacles to the flow of foreign investment in Saudi Arabia in the context of the dual forces that have historically defined the Kingdom’s ambivalent investment law regime.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the available judicial precedence using both the United Arab Emirates and UK laws to bring up a much broader understanding of wrongful and fraudulent trading concepts and provide a critical analysis of potential personal liabilities of directors in the UK and UAE jurisdictions for the acts of fraud and mismanagement.

This paper seeks to understand corporate fraud from the aspect of trading. It will take an in-depth look into wrongful trading and fraudulent trading in the UAE and UK jurisdictions while analyzing the punishment for the same. The study will also look at famous cases for the same while seeking to understand the mitigation measures undertaken in various nations across the world.

The author studies the contents and provisions of the UK Insolvency Act 1986, truly the concepts of wrongful trading and fraudulent trading are not explicitly mentioned in the UAE Law, but the said terms associated with “lifting of corporate veil” are notionally existent under the UAE Federal Law No2/2015, otherwise known as Companies Law (Articles 84 and 162-1), and under the UAE Bankruptcy Law (Federal Decree Law No. 9 of 2016), which provides legislation governing trading while the company is insolvent.

In the current paper, the author is keen to examine the available judicial precedence to bring up a much broader understanding of the mentioned concepts and provide a critical analysis of potential personal liabilities of directors in the UK and UAE jurisdictions for the acts of fraud and mismanagement.

The Howard Shuttering Contractors case throws considerable light on the importance which the tribunals attach to warnings before dismissing an employee. In this case the tribunal took great pains to interpret the intention of the parties to the different site agreements, and it came to the conclusion that the agreed procedure was not followed. One other matter, which must be particularly noted by employers, is that where a final warning is required, this final warning must be “a warning”, and not the actual dismissal. So that where, for example, three warnings are to be given, the third must be a “warning”. It is after the employee has misconducted himself thereafter that the employer may dismiss.

This study aims to examine the validity of the installment payment contract when using the first Islamic credit card (ICC) in Jordan and will explore the hidden techniques that are used to operate such a financial product. The purpose of the study will be achieved by examining the structure and the issues surrounding the first ICC that was introduced to the Jordanian market as a hybrid contract of Qard Hassan (benevolent loan), Murabaha, Wakalah (agency) and Bay‘ Al Ajjal (credit sale). In addition, a further objective is to examine whether this credit card is a Sharia-compliant financial product.

A qualitative research method approach was adopted to understand the issues, nature and structure of the first Jordanian ICC. This was due to the explanatory nature of the product, the different financial solutions it offered and the fact that the ICC in Jordan is, to date, relatively unexplored. This paper used the technique of content/thematic analysis that involves multiple sequenced steps to analyze these matters.

The main finding of this research is that the first ICC in the Jordanian financial market has caused a degree of uncertainty. This is because, once a customer decides to choose the installment payment contract option, the bank does not have real possession of the assets in question. The issue of constructive possession has been denied by several classic and contemporary Islamic scholars, including the General Iftaa Department of Jordan. Therefore, it can be seen that the installment payment contract option does not comply with Islamic principles and particular Fatwas that have been decreed.

This is the first study that shows how the first ICC, being a new Islamic financial product in Jordan, operates in relation to the installment payment contract. In addition, focusing on the concept of changing the nature of the contract from a Qard Hassan (benevolent loan) to a hybrid contract is significant, to encourage Islamic scholars to take a clear, legal stand under Sharia law.