The Private Public Divide In International Dispute Resolution

This course addresses dispute resolution in international cases from the classical perspective of the private-public divide. The main focus relates to overlapping remedies available under private international and public international law. Nowadays, a multitude of courts and arbitral tribunals at different levels (domestic, international and transnational) is accessible to litigants in cross-border settings.

This course addresses dispute resolution in international cases from the classical perspective of the private-public divide. The main focus relates to overlapping remedies available under private international and public international law. Nowadays, a multitude of courts and arbitral tribunals at different levels (domestic, international and transnational) is accessible to litigants in cross-border settings. There are three different areas where the private-public divide is applicable. The first pertains to lawsuits in civil courts involving foreign states, state enterprises and international organizations. The second area relates to the delineation between domestic and international remedies. The third area concerns the privatization of dispute settlement, especially in the context of private ordering. This study argues that the private-public divide still exists and cannot be given up. However, one must be aware that private and public international law have complementary functions in order to address adequately the multitude of disputes at both the cross-border and the international level. In this context, this divide can be used as an appropriate tool to explain the complementarity of private and public international law in the multilevel legal structure of a globalized world.

In the process of resolving disputes, it is not uncommon for parties to justify actions otherwise in breach of their obligations by invoking the need to protect some aspect of the elusive concept of public order. Until this thoroughly researched book, the criteria and factors against which international dispute bodies assess such claims have remained unclear. Now, by providing an in-depth comparative analysis of relevant jurisprudence under four distinct international dispute resolution systems – trade, investment, human rights and international commercial arbitration – the author of this invaluable book identifies common core benchmarks for the application of the public order exception. To achieve the broadest possible scope for her analysis, the author examines the public order exception’s function, role and application within the following international dispute resolution systems: relevant World Trade Organization (WTO) agreements as enforced by the organization’s Dispute Settlement Body and Appellate Body; international investment agreements as enforced by competent Arbitral Tribunals and Annulment Committees under the International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes; provisions under the Inter-American Convention of Human Rights and the European Convention of Human Rights as enforced by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the European Court of Human Rights, respectively; and the New York Convention as enforced by national tribunals across the world. Controversies, tensions and pitfalls inherent in invoking the public order exception are elucidated, along with clear guidelines on how arguments may be crafted in order to enhance prospects of success. Throughout, tables and graphs systematize key aspects of the relevant jurisprudence under each of the dispute resolution systems analysed. As an immediate practical resource for lawyers on any side of a dispute who wish to invoke or strengthen a public order exception claim, the book’s systematic analysis will be welcomed by lawyers active in WTO disputes, international investment arbitration, human rights law or enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. Academics and policymakers will find a signal contribution to the ongoing debate on the existence, legal basis, content and functions of the transnational public order.

Horatia Muir Watt and Diego P. Fernández-Arroyo: Introduction: The Relevance of Private International Law to the Global Governance Debate Part I: BEHIND CLOSED DOORS: THE PRIVATE MODEL AND ITS DISCONTENTS Section A. Epistemological Challenge: The Meaning of 'Private' in Private International Law 1: Geoffrey Samuel: Comparative Law as Resistance 2: Robert Wai: Private v Private: Transnational Private Law and Contestation in Global Economic Governance 3: Ralf Michaels: Post-critical Private International Law: From Politics to Technique Section B. Political Critique: Privatization as Homogenization 4: Tomaso Ferrando: Global Land Grabbing: A Tale of Three Legal Homogenizations 5: Veronica Corcodel: Governance Implications of Comparative Legal Thinking: On Henry Maine's Jurisprudence and British Imperialism Section C. Searching for Legitimacy: Questions of Design 6: Diego P. Fernández-Arroyo: Private Adjudication Without Precedent? 7: Gilles Cuniberti: The Merchant Who Would Not Be King: Unreasoned Fears about Private Lawmaking 8: Yannick Radi: Balancing the Public and the Private in International Investment Law PART II: BEYOND THE SCHISM: EMERGING MODELS AND WORLDVIEWS Section A. The Global Turn to Informality: Pragmatism and Constructivism 9: Benoit Frydman: A Pragmatic Approach To Global Law 10: Harm Schepel: Rules of Recognition: A Legal Constructivist Approach to Transnational Private Regulation 11: Michael Karayanni: The Extraterritorial Application of Access to Justice Rights: On the Availability of Israeli Courts to Palestinian Plaintiffs Section B. Re-importing Public Law Methodology: Federalism and Constitutionalism 12: Alex Mills: Variable Geometry, Peer Governance, and the Public International Perspective on Private International Law 13: Jacco Bomhoff: The Constitution of the Conflict of Laws 14: Jérémy Heymann: Importing Proportionality to the Conflict of Laws Section C. Reinventing a Global Horizon: Working towards a Global Public Good 15: Bram van der Eem: Financial Stability and Private International Law 16: Ivana Isailovic: Recognition(and Mis-recognition) in Private International Law 17: Sabine Corneloup: Can Private International Law Contribute to Global Migration Governance? Horatia Muir Watt: Paradigm Change in Private International Law: Renewal, Circularity, or Decline?

Despite the unprecedented growth of arbitration and other means of ADR in treaties and transnational contracts in recent years, there remains no clearly defined mechanism for control of the system. One of the oldest yet largely marginalized concepts in law is the public policy exception. This doctrine grants discretion to courts to set aside private legal arrangements, including arbitration, which might be considered harmful to the "public". The exceptional and vague nature of the doctrine, along with the strong push of actors in dispute resolution, has transformed it, in certain jurisdictions, to a toothless doctrine. At the international level, the notion of transnational public policy has been devised in order to capture norms that are "truly" transnational and amenable for application in cross-border litigations. Yet, despite the importance of this discussion—a safety valve and a control mechanism for today’s international and domestic international dispute resolution— no major study has ventured to review and analyze it. This book provides a historical, theoretical and practical background on public policy in dispute resolution with a focus on cross-border and transnational disputes. Farshad Ghodoosi argues that courts should adopt a more systemic approach to public policy while rejecting notions such as transnational public policy, which limits the application of those norms with mandatory nature. Contrary to the current trend, the book invites the reader to re-conceptualize the role of public policy, and transnational dispute resolution, in order to have more sustainable, fair and efficient mechanisms for resolving disputes outside of national courts. The book sheds light on one of the most important yet often-neglected control mechanisms of today’s international dispute resolution and will be of particular interest to students and academics in the fields of International Investment Law, International Trade Law, Business and Economics.

In the contemporary discipline of conflict resolution, adjudication and alternative dispute resolution (ADR) are often seen as antagonistic trends. This important book contends that, on the contrary, it is the bringing together of these trends that holds the most promise for an effective system of international justice. With great insight and passion, built firmly on a vast knowledge of the field, Lars Kirchhoff exposes the contemporary structural barriers to effective conflict resolution, defining where adjudication ends and ADR--and particularly the recent development of mediated third party intervention from an 'art' to a veritable 'science'--must come into play. The work starts by defining the challenges, potentials and shortcomings of different approaches to conflict resolution in an interdependent world--where the multiplicity of actors, topics and interests involved even in seemingly bilateral conflict situations is clearly manifest--and goes on to define useful models and connect the various elements relevant for the resolution of conflicts in a transparent way. In the course of its investigation the book accomplishes the following: * illustrates the various departure points and perspectives scholars of conflict resolution have taken as the basis for their work; discusses who should become involved in conflicts as a third party and by which techniques this should occur; systematically conveys the nature and consequences of intervention through mediation, focusing on the method's critical challenges; and clarifies the particular model of international mediation under development through UN initiatives. In approaching these intertwined topics, the author draws concrete conclusions for the realms of international law and related disciplines as well as for the organizational context of the United Nations. He explores such diverse scenarios as conflicts between States, conflicts involving international organizations, and--in accordance with the changing parameters of international law--even conflicts involving individuals, clarifying which constellations can be tackled by international mediation and which conflicts should be dealt with by other forms of diplomacy or adjudication. It is the conviction of many intermediaries and scholars that the considerable potential inherent in resolving conflicts peacefully is rarely put into practice. Although some of the reasons for this phenomenon are beyond the influence of scholarly debate, in many instances the reasons for failure of peaceful resolution processes are more structural or systemic in nature. It is the great virtue of this book that it establishes enough clarity in an unclear and complex field to make concrete and workable recommendations in these instances, and for that reason it will be of immeasurable value and benefit to all scholars, policymakers, and activists dedicated to the pursuit of peace.

Formal law versus informal justice – these are two frequently invoked labels to highlight the distinction between court-based and “alternative” dispute resolution (ADR). Indeed, it appears to be all but a truism to assume that ADR has developed as a more flexible and creative alternative to rigid and formalised judicial proceedings. In Formalisation and Flexibilisation in Dispute Resolution scholars from four continents examine both historical and recent developments that cast doubt on the validity of these widespread assumptions. They not only explore trends towards an increased formalisation of ADR procedures but also address the tendencies of state civil justice systems to adopt flexible and informal tools for the resolution of disputes in the courts. Editors Joachim Zekoll, Moritz Bälz and Iwo Amelung have divided the book into three Parts. Part One seeks to develop the general theme of formalisation from several angles, including a socio-legal perspective, the public-private divide, the regulatory challenges and potential tensions with the rule of law. The emphasis of Part Two is on the historical emergence of formal and informal dispute resolution instruments in several legal and cultural contexts. Historical roots, be they genuine or construed, also play a role in the other two parts of the book, but in this part, they take centre stage. Finally, Part Three features chapters which address and elaborate on specific applications such as ADR as means of consumer dispute resolution and arbitration in transnational investment disputes. While the contributions to the first two parts of this volume already raise normative questions in some respects, this final part evaluates and passes judgement on the potential merits and deficits of ADR in a variety of specific settings.

In its forty-fourth session the General Assembly of the United Nations proclaimed the 1990s as the Decade of International Law. One of the main purposes of the decade is the promotion of effective means for peaceful international dispute settlement, and, especially, strenghtening the role of and respect for the International Court of Justice, the principal judicial organ of the United Nations. The editors of this book contribute to this aim by bringing together a variety of opinions by international legal experts on peaceful dispute settlement. The subject is approached from different angles, ranging from the role of the International Law Commission and the Non-Aligned Movement to human rights and space law disputes, in order to identify areas of international law where room exists for further development of existing means for peaceful settlement of international disputes. A general conclusion which can be drawn from this survey is that the focus of attention should not be aimed primarily at strenghtening the role of the International Court of Justice, e.g. by amending some of its rules or by trying to increase its political acceptability through diplomatic efforts. Instead, the focus should be on small scale improvements within specific areas of international law with an emphasis on the relation between dispute settlement and supervision. Furthermore, it seems essential for a real improvement to give non-governmental organisations or private persons a greater role in upholding the rule of international law, whether in domestic courts or in international fora. This work has been published previously in the Leiden Journal of International Law, Special Issue (3 LJIL 90).