Search results

Investigates the differences in protocols between arbitral tribunals and courts, with particular emphasis on US, Greek and English law. Gives examples of each country and its way of using the law in specific circumstances, and shows the variations therein. Sums up that arbitration is much the better way to gok as it avoids delays and expenses, plus the vexation/frustration of normal litigation. Concludes that the US and Greek constitutions and common law tradition in England appear to allow involved parties to choose their own judge, who can thus be an arbitrator. Discusses e‐commerce and speculates on this for the future.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze provisions which are related to court’s intervention over an arbitral tribunal’s jurisdiction under the revised Korean Arbitration Act (2016) and the UNCITRAL Model Law.

The author studies a theory about court’s intervention over an arbitral tribunal’s jurisdiction by studying some scholarly writings and compares the revised provisions in the KAA (2016) with those in the KAA (2010) and the UNCITRAL Model Law (2006).

There is no clear and internationally unified answer to which theory between the prima facie test and the full review test is appropriate for court’s intervention to arbitration. The analysis of the provision shows that the revised ones in the KAA (2016) will make arbitration to be conducted faster and more efficiently by giving practical answers to issues raised.

It has been just over one year since the KAA (2016) became effective, so it limits evaluation on whether these revised provisions related to court’s intervention over jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal is successful or not.

This study is comparatively new one after the KAA (2016) became effective. So, it is expected to provide a guidance for further studies.

The Equal Pay Act 1970 (which came into operation on 29 December 1975) provides for an “equality clause” to be written into all contracts of employment. S.1(2) (a) of the 1970 Act (which has been amended by the Sex Discrimination Act 1975) provides:

This paper aims to discuss the benefits and disadvantages of the law on the expansion of the jurisdiction of the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) Court. The major role of DIFC Courts in the Arab community is to handle cases related to commerce and business. For a long time, the court had been acting only in their geographical area until a new law was enacted to extend their jurisdiction all over the world. Afterward, a lot of criticism emerged as for why and how the court will benefit from such actions. The law has drawn a harsh response, although most benefits have also been experienced since the court received quite a large number of new signings. Interaction at the world business forum has benefited the economy of Dubai thanks to the law.

The following study focuses on a description of such benefits and drawbacks. The study does not evaluate a factual process of expansion but indicates the most distinct evidence of positive, as well as negative consequences of the expansion.

It is appropriate to make a general comment on the fact that the expansion of DIFC Court is not sufficiently effective at the current stage. Needless to say, it contains numerous positive aspects, but the gaps are evidently essential because they place the entire Court in a hard circumstance. The Court does not have a well-developed legal framework for its new area of jurisdiction as long as its limited volume of prior precedent is a distinct sign of the Court’s dependence on the UAE’s Law. In such way, DIFC Court will not be able to address issues within new fields of jurisdiction, as it simply lacks an expertise and international law in its legal framework. Moreover, the jurisdiction over new areas of international business was not verified with a plain system of mediation, which is why a current expansion of DIFC Court has to be recognized as redundant. However, its advantages are tending to produce their effects provided that the Court manages to address its current problems.

The study has described the basic benefits and drawbacks of DIFC Court expansion. To speak about the main benefits, they can be depicted as appliance of the common law, unification of English language for proceedings, presence of a preliminary arbitration and guarantees of award enforcement. In a similar way, the drawbacks of the expansion have been issued. The study has identified such drawbacks as lack of international and sophisticated expertise, untested legal framework, strong influence of forum non conveniens, and existence of a limited volume of prior precedent. The paper has not assessed a success of a factual expansion of DIFC Court jurisdiction, but it has managed to fulfill its primary purpose. Thus, the paper has identified a certain tendency concerning the expansion.

The phenomena of arbitral forum shopping to resolve a commercial investment dispute is still under development and more complicated in many states. However, for Pakistan, it seems in an evolutionary phase, where the country is struggling hard to adopt the best practice of dispute resolution through forum shopping clauses. This struggle is even more inflated with huge Chinese investment through China Pakistan economic corridor (CPEC) projects in Pakistan, which come alongside with commercial investment disputes. For this purpose, the current treaty or contract-based system between China and Pakistan and litigation based domestic civil court structure look obsolete, hence, appear to require reinstatement of forum shopping clauses under concerned treaties or contracts for CPEC investment-related issues.

The authors choose a legal research method. The research design is a comparative analysis between CPEC contracts and dispute resolution mechanism between China and Pakistan and also the domestic civil court’s litigation system. This analysis selected by the authors due to inefficient bilateral investment arrangements and efficient resolution of future commercial disputes in CPEC. While the international arbitration system is included in the assessment were particular in the time and space context. The comparison comprises on dispute resolution clauses in free trade agreement (FTA) and bilateral investment treaties (BIT) between China and Pakistan and the system of resolving disputes by CPEC clauses.

The authors finds that in the absence of CPEC forum shopping clause under dispute resolution system, Pakistan is highly at risk to lose foreign investors, and therefore, set back the goal of long term economic sustainability in the region. However, China has already made its investment policies safer with establishing three international commercial courts (also referred to as Belt and Road courts), one in Xi’an for the land-based Silk Road Economic Belt, one in Shenzhen for the Maritime Silk Road and one in Beijing that will serve as the headquarters. These courts will be offering litigation, arbitration and mediation services. According to one view, China aims to have all belt and road initiative (BRI) disputes resolved by these courts. This makes Pakistan position more awkward and needs proactive measures, as CPEC investment is based on Pakistan foreign direct investment policies and legal structure. Therefore, it will be complicated and less favourable for Pakistan to deal with such cases under Chinese Courts.

The paper’s primary contribution is finding that comprehensive analysis of alternative dispute resolution mechanism between China and Pakistan over CPEC investment is inevitable. A socio-legal research combine with an examination of Singapore International Commercial Court functions and mechanism and CPEC plans further contributes to ascertain the best model of the settlement of commercial disputes under investments in Pakistan. This research paper anticipates future economic and legal problems, which Pakistan may encounter.

Knight's Industrial Law Reports goes into a new style and format as Managerial Law This issue of KILR is restyled Managerial Law and it now appears on a continuous updating basis rather than as a monthly routine affair.

A distinction must be drawn between a dismissal on the one hand, and on the other a repudiation of a contract of employment as a result of a breach of a fundamental term of that contract. When such a repudiation has been accepted by the innocent party then a termination of employment takes place. Such termination does not constitute dismissal (see London v. James Laidlaw & Sons Ltd (1974) IRLR 136 and Gannon v. J. C. Firth (1976) IRLR 415 EAT).

The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), created by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) in 1983, resolves disputes between athletes and national or international sports governing bodies. The purpose of this paper is to critically examine the history and functions of CAS, with a particular focus on the ways in which athletes’ rights are threatened by the IOC’s Code of Sports-Related Arbitration.

The author reviews relevant law literature and media sources.

The concept of lex sportiva (global sport law), general arbitration practices and controversies concerning CAS’s impartiality are investigated, and the “strict liability” principle that CAS applies to doping allegations is assessed. This analysis points to a long record of inconsistencies and contradictions in the history and function of CAS. The findings lead to questions of arbitration or litigation; confidential or public proceedings; specialist or generalist arbitrators; lex sportiva or international legal principles; precedential or non-precedential awards; and civil or criminal burden of proof.

These unresolved issues demonstrate how the IOC struggles to maintain supremacy over world sport by promoting sport exceptionalism, and provide possible grounds for athletes’ future challenges to CAS.

This is the first of two articles which describes the operation of third party intervention in New Zealand. It explores the changes that have occurred to union registration; the Labour Court and Compliance Orders brought about by the introduction of the Labour Relations Act of 1987. The article also examines some of the implications of the Act on the practice of industrial relations.

In order to succeed in an action under the Equal Pay Act 1970, should the woman and the man be employed by the same employer on like work at the same time or would the woman still be covered by the Act if she were employed on like work in succession to the man? This is the question which had to be solved in Macarthys Ltd v. Smith. Unfortunately it was not. Their Lordships interpreted the relevant section in different ways and since Article 119 of the Treaty of Rome was also subject to different interpretations, the case has been referred to the European Court of Justice.