Další formáty:
BibTeX
LaTeX
RIS
@proceedings{1323856, author = {Janečková, Pavlína}, booktitle = {Cofola International 2015 : Current Challenges to Resolution of International (Cross-border) Disputes: Conference Proceedings}, keywords = {ICC arbitration; the interpretation; the UNIDROIT Principles}, language = {eng}, title = {Interpretation of the contract in ICC arbitration}, year = {2015} }
TY - CONF ID - 1323856 AU - Janečková, Pavlína PY - 2015 TI - Interpretation of the contract in ICC arbitration KW - ICC arbitration KW - the interpretation KW - the UNIDROIT Principles N2 - In international commercial disputes it could be more difficult to determine the real and common will of both parties by reference to a single applicable national law (especially if there was no choice of law). Because of that, another approach is sometimes favoured. In arbitration there is a larger space for that (compared to the state courts), because arbitrator’s position is different from that of state courts, which are bound to apply the rules of conflict of laws. Opposite to that the international arbitrator often does not have lex fori. Thus, in arbitration another approach (than application the rules of conflict of laws of lex fori) can be provided by the UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts. In some cases the ICC arbitral tribunal referred to the Chapter 4 of the UNIDROIT Principles, which is focused on the interpretation of legal conduct. The aim of this paper is to analyse the ICC approach to the interpretation of the contract between parties (or we can say the interpretation of the intentions of the parties) and the way in which the Chapter 4 of the UNIDROIT Principles is used for that. As anational rule of law, the UNIDROIT Principles are applied in some cases, especially to supplement the governing law or to fill gaps in applied law. ER -
JANEČKOVÁ, Pavlína. Interpretation of the contract in ICC arbitration. In \textit{Cofola International 2015 : Current Challenges to Resolution of International (Cross-border) Disputes: Conference Proceedings}. 2015.
|