Discuss The Doctrine Of “kompetenz-kompetenz” In International Commercial Arbitration

The Doctrine of Kompetenz-KompetenzIn International commercialised arbitrament_________________________________Students Name___________________________________Instructor[Date]The Doctrine of Kompetenz-KompetenzIn International commercialized ArbitrationIntroductionInternational arbitrament has been used to resolve disputes for a long time . As noted by one commentator : Commercial arbitration must have existed since the dawn of commerce (Musthill , 2006 ) unluckily another side of business transactions , corruption , has been near a long time also . Inevitably , it has appeared in planetary commercial arbitration cases . This article reviews some of those cases and analyzes the evolving trends on how international arbitrators have dealt with this difficult issue (Bribes , 1998 , Martin , 1999 , Levi Raphael , 1999Kompetenz-kompetenz refers to an arbitral judicial system s power to determine whether it has jurisdiction to decide a sway ( Wyss , 1997 Although the arbitrator s power to eclipse on her own jurisdiction is generally recognized throughout the world , ICC case o . 1110 (1963 ) is one of the first reported international arbitral awards dealings with corruption . The Comment will address the issue of kompetenz-kompetenz and divisible teachings . The ICC Case No . 8891 illustrating the role of the Arbitrator in the international policy issuesKompetenz-KompetenzThe competence or jurisdiction of the arbitral judgeship to decide upon a digest involving corruption has been challenged in a number of arbitral awards . Probably the most well know case is ICC Case No . 1110 (Arb n XXI (1996 ) 47 ) where the fix arbitrator , Judge Lagergren disqualified himself as not having jurisdiction . That case has been subsequently distinguished (Wetter , 1963 ) on the grounds that the arbitration agreement was entirely separate and distinct from the engageual relationships of the partiesThe doctrine of victory can be described as a principle that gives precedence to Community police force over the law of the instalment States within its proper sphere of competence .

and then , advantage is not absolute per se Hence , supremacy does not imply a universal subordination of Member State law to Community law (MacCormick , 1995 ) The justification for supremacy given by the ECJ relates to the rule of law and the necessity of a coherent Community legalThis principle is supported by expression 16 .1 of the UNCITRAL Model Law (UNCITRAL , 1985 ) and Article 21 .2 of the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules (UNCITRAL , 1976 ) which essentially say : The arbitral tribunal may rule on its own jurisdiction , including any objections with respect to the creative activity or validity of the arbitration agreement . For that purpose , an arbitration clause which forms part of a contract shall be tough as an agreement independent of the other terms of the contract . A decision by the arbitral tribunal that the contract is null and void shall not entail ipso jure the invalidity of the arbitration clause As referred to in the Westinghouse case , Article 6 (2 ) of the 1998 ICC Rules of Arbitration states : the Court may decide , without prejudice to the admissibility or merits of the plea or pleas , that the arbitration shall proceed if it is prima facie satisfactory that an arbitration agreement under the Rules may existDoctrine of Autonomy...If you want to disturb a full essay, order it on our website: Orderessay

If you want to get a full essay, wisit our page: write my essay .