Metrika

  • citati u SCIndeksu: 0
  • citati u CrossRef-u:0
  • citati u Google Scholaru:[]
  • posete u poslednjih 30 dana:44
  • preuzimanja u poslednjih 30 dana:44

Sadržaj

članak: 1 od 14  
Back povratak na rezultate
2020, vol. 2, br. 1, str. 47-66
Ex aequo et bono u međunarodnoj arbitraži
aKaranović & Partners law office, Belgrade
bArchipel law office, Geneva, Switzerland

e-adresamilan.lazic@karanovicpartners.com, gpalermo@archipel.law, srdjan.dragicevic@karanovicpartners.com
Sažetak
U radu se analizira institut ex aequo et bono u arbitraži, uz polazište da on ne podrazumeva nijedan dodatni rizik koji nije svojstven rešavanju sporova generalno. S druge strane, ex aequo et bono poseduje atribute koji bi mogli da unaprede i poboljšaju postupak rešavanja sporova, kao što su veći akcenat na činjenicama, princip tzv. "korektivne pravde" i pravična rešenja koja nisu sputana i ograničena strogim zakonskim odredbama. Iako je u određenim oblastima ili predmetima primena ovog instituta možda lakša i prirodnija (kao što je sportska arbitraža), autori smatraju da bi institut ex aequo et bono trebalo primeniti u mnogo širem spektru slučajeva jer bi primena ovog instituta mogla da pojednostavi, ubrza i uopšte unapredi arbitražni postupak ali i da jasnije istakne razliku između arbitraže i previše formalnog pristupa državnih sudova. Na kraju, izbor ex aequo et bono je izričito predviđen i dozvoljen u brojnim arbitražnim pravilima i zakonima, čineći odluke donete uz ex aequo et bono izvršivim u velikom broju jurisdikcija.
Reference
Berger, B., Kellerhals, F. (2015) International and domestic arbitration in Switzerland. Bern
Bertrand, E. (2005) Amiable composition: Report of the ICC France Working Group. International Business Law Journal, No. 6
Born, G. (2014) International commercial arbitration. Kluwer Law International
Christie, R.H. (1992) Amiable composition in French and English law. Arbitration, Vol. 58, No. 4
Greenberg, S., Kee, C., Weeramantry, J. (2011) International commercial arbitration: An Asia-Pacific perspective. New York: Cambridge University Press
Hasler, E. (2016) The basketball arbitral tribunal: An overview of its process and decisions. u: Yearbook of International Sports Arbitration 2015, The Hague
Hasler, E. (2018) Back to the future: The first CAS arbitrators on CAS's first award (TAS 86/1, HC X c. LSHG) and its evolution since then. u: Yearbook of International Sports Arbitration 2016, The Hague
Kaufmann-Kohler, G., Rigozzi, A. (2010) Arbitrage international: Droit et pratique à la lumière de la LDIP. Bern - Weblaw
Kroll, S. (1999) Contractual gap-filling by arbitration tribunals. International Arbitration Law Review, Vol. 2, No. 1
Queen Marry and White Case (2015) International arbitration survey: Improvements and innovations in international arbitration
Stojšić-Dabetić, J. (2018) Overriding mandatory rules in the international private law. Pravo - teorija i praksa, vol. 35, br. 4-6, str. 45-60
Tanaka, Y. (2004) Reflections on maritime delimitation in the Cameroon/Nigeria case. International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 53(2), 369-406
Teramura, N. (2018) Ex Aequo et Bono: An overlooked and undervalued opportunity for international commercial arbitration. Kluwer Arbitration Blog
Teramura, N. (2019) The strengths and weaknesses of arguments pertaining to Ex Aequo Et Bono. Asian International Arbitration Journal, Kluwer Law International, Vol. 15
Waincymer, J. (2012) Procedure and evidence in international arbitration. Kluwer Law International
Zuberbühler, T., Muller, K., et al. (2005) Swiss rules of international arbitration: Commentary. Kluwer Law International
 

O članku

jezik rada: engleski
vrsta rada: izvorni naučni članak
DOI: 10.5937/RKSPP2001047L
objavljen u SCIndeksu: 03.06.2020.