NV, Leiden, 2008 Review of Central and East European Law 33 (2008) 257-294 The New Face of CEFTA and its DisputeResolutionMechanisms *FEHF=J= EQGKREɅ Abstract Amendments made to the Central European Free Trade Agreement (CEFTA) EJ I=NG OECJE?=JP @ARAHKLIAJPO EJ PDA A?KJKIE? EJPACN=PEKJ KB PDA
Based on research on a number of judicial decisions regarding concession and Public–Private Partnership (PPP) agreements, this paper demonstrates the problems and dilemmas of China’s current PPP dispute resolution mechanism and clarifies three fundamental issues: concession≠PPP; concession agreement ≠ administrative agreement; and disputes related to administrative agreements≠administrative disputes. On the grounds of these conclusions, the paper argues that the logical chain of China’s existing PPP and concession dispute resolution mechanism is untenable. The logic of the current mechanism starts from the definition of an administrative agreement; it then classifies concession agreement as administrative agreement; and finally subjects the disputes over concession agreements to administrative litigation. Yet, this starting point is problematic because the definition of administrative agreement and the distinction between public and private law attributes are difficult to determine precisely, as they lack the necessary theoretical clarity and uniqueness. Overall, the current legal situation of PPP in China is far from being satisfactory because a statutory law on PPP is absent, the existing laws and regulations on administrative agreements are primitive, and the judicial practice has not yet established unified and clear criteria. Against this backdrop, this paper proposes a possible way out. First, we should critically reflect on the current administrative agreement and PPP agreement theory. Then, we should apply the method of legal fact research, adopt doctrinal tools of the legal relationship theory and contract construction theory, and eventually establish a multiple dispute resolution mechanism to resolve disputes effectively.
F. Vagts, Detlev, Keywords: International commercial law | Dispute resolution | Arbitration |, Mots clefs: Droit commercial international | Règlement de litiges d'ordre juridique | Arbitrage |, Detlev Vagts, Professor at Harvard Law School, devotes his course to dispute-resolutionmechanisms in
EMPLOYMENT DISPUTERESOLUTIONMECHANISM FROM THE ISLAMIC PERSPECTIVE Kamal Halili Hassan 1 Introduction This article discusses the employment dispute mechanism from the Islamic perspective. Admittedly, a lot has been written about dispute resolution in Islam, especially on arbitration, but for
This unique series offers the reader a comprehensive, bilingual analysis on a case-by-case basis of the jurisprudence of the WTO. Each case study contains: a synopsis and details of the case in question, and important bibliographical references; these are followed by a summary of the facts and procedure, claims of the parties, findings of the panel, issues raised in the appeal, conclusions of the appellate body and scholarly observations. Each case is analyzed by a different scholar in the field, so as to ensure the involvement in the series of the widest range of (English and French speaking) scholars and practitioners.
This approach to the case-law gives the reader a complete and objective account of the reasoning of the dispute resolution mechanism, including numerous quotes (in italics when they are extracted from the case in question, for ease of reference), while at the same time offering a critical perspective, which analyses the reasoning adopted and places it in a global perspective.
The volumes are organized chronologically.