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

The Doctrine of Kompetenz-KompetenzIn International technical arbitrement_________________________________Students Name___________________________________Instructor[Date]The Doctrine of Kompetenz-KompetenzIn International mercenary ArbitrationIntroductionInternational arbitrement has been used to resolve disputes for a long condemn . As noned by one commentator : commercial message arbitrement must have existed since the dawn of commerce (Musthill , 2006 ) alas a nonher side of business transactions , corruption , has been closely a long time also . Inevitably , it has appeared in internationalisticist commercial arbitrament 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 arbitramental court of justice s power to determine whether it has legal power to decide a rivalry ( Wyss , 1997 Although the arbitrator s power to form 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 severable dogmas . The ICC Case No . 8891 illustrating the role of the Arbitrator in the international policy issuesKompetenz-KompetenzThe competence or jurisdiction of the arbitral move lodge to decide upon a focus involving corruption has been challenged in a number of arbitral awards . Probably the most easy cognise case is ICC Case No . 1110 (Arb n XXI (1996 ) 47 ) where the restore arbitrator , Judge Lagergren disqualified himself as not having jurisdiction . That case has been subsequently distinguished (Wetter , 1963 ) on the one thousand that the arbitration agreemen! t was entirely separate and distinct from the consent to hold ofual relationships of the partiesThe doctrine of conquest can be depict as a belief that gives precedence to participation instinctive law over the law of the instalment States within its decent sphere of competence .

consequently , success is not inviolate 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 territory of law and the necessity of a coherent Community legalThis principle is supported by obli ge 16 .1 of the UNCITRAL Model justness (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 introduction or validity of the arbitration agreement . For that purpose , an arbitration clause which forms part of a contract shall be set as an agreement single-handed 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 satisfied that an arbitration agreement under(a) the Rules may existDoctrine of Autonomy...If you want to get a full essay, put i n it on our website: OrderCustomPaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: write my paper