The current regulatory framework governing International Commercial Arbitration1 and International Investment Arbitration Law, hereinafter ‘ICA/IIA’ Law is problematic. A new harmonised ICA/IIA Law addressing current laws and trends in these two separate but interrelated areas of International Law applicable to both investor-investor commercial disputes and Investor-MENA States (particularly in regards to oil concession and foreign investment contract disputes) is required to form the foundation of a single regulatory framework. A HICIALC will ensure courts rule in favour of arbitral award enforcement. Reasons for the ever importance of Arbitral Award enforcement will be given. This new law, based on general principles of law found at Civil, Common and Sharia law traditions, hereinafter ‘the three traditions’, will allow for higher enforcement through addressing gaps in the New York Arbitration Convention of 1958, the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Model Law, and the Washington Convention of 1966 of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes. This article makes use of a comparative law analysis, (in the traditional and scholarly meaning of the term), in the service of drafting a new HICIALC. Thus, the theoretical framework underpinning a harmonized law can be derived from existing legal principles in common at Civil, Common and Sharia Law, especially in the fields of ICA, IIA and the laws of MENA States, demonstrating that International Contract Law, and International Arbitration Law (whether it governs ICA or IIA Law) are thus all well-suited to harmonisation.
|Number of pages||38|
|Journal||Macquarie journal of business law|
|Publication status||Published - 2010|