Critically analyse whether courts too readily intervene in the Research Paper

Critically analyse whether courts too readily intervene in the international commercial arbitration process, so that party autonomy is qualified - Research Paper Example that they want to settle their matter in way that is alternative to the courts, and, by agreeing to an arbitration clause, the parties have explicitly rejected the courts jurisdiction. This can occur for any number of reasons, including the unacceptability, unsuitability and the inappropriateness of the court. Whatever the reason, arbitration clauses make clear the parties intent, and this intent is to not litigate their dispute. 3 The arbitral tribunal has the responsibility in disposing of all matters that are subject to dispute.4 Therefore, court intervention in these matters is potentially problematic, and can even be said to be contrary to the parties intentions. Yet, courts routinely get involved in matters that are set to be resolved by arbitration. Although there are some advantages to court intervention, there are significant disadvantages as well. For one, court intervention introduces the complications that arbitration is designed to avoid – it makes arbitration expensive, lengthy, and less efficient. Arbitration challenges â€Å"result in parallel proceedings, create potentially lengthy appeals, and require parties to retain local counsel at the seat of arbitration.†5 Moreover, according to at least one commentator, court intervention is usually only seen when emotions are high,6 which means that court intervention would tend to have even more of a deleterious affect on arbitration proceedings. There are a variety of reasons why courts get involved, and the forms of court involved are also varied. At base, courts cannot be completely excluded from the arbitration process because they are required to enforce arbitration agreements and awards, and need to police and support the arbitration process with international standards.7 The power that the courts have in the arbitration process may be categorised as powers of assistance, powers of intervention, powers of supervision or control, and powers of recognition and enforcement.8 The courts

Political Act Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Political Act - Essay Example He resigned the Yugoslav presidency amid demonstrations, following the disputed presidential election of September 24, 2000. (wikipedia.com). He surrendered to the JSO (an elite group of police in Serbia), to avoid forced arrest in April 1, 2001. This put in compliance with an American deadline. The warrant had previously been made on suspicion of corruption, abuse of power, and embezzlement. The charges were domestic. The legitimacy of the arrest was not proven since Milosevic surrender; however putting Milosevic in jail is not legal. The investigation does not have a hard evidence to convict the former president. The Serbian Prime Minister Milosevic act during the war convicted him for committing war crimes. During the Yugoslav war in 1990 and Kosovo war in 1999 he conducted his own defense at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, where he stood accused of crimes against humanity, violating the laws or customs of war, grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions and genocide. The decision of the court of not giving him the proper medical treatment is legitimate in the sense that he is convicted of a crime, but the said action is illegal since every person is entitled to have a proper treatment. His trial ended without verdict because he died during the proceedings. He suffered from heart ailments and high blood pressure. In the case of President Milosevic he had made a legitimate act during the war since he is the president; however he violated the laws of war and the Geneva Conventions. The political acts performed by Milosevic are a good example of legitimate act but legal. There are also cases wherein political act is legitimate but it does not necessarily need to be legal. In the case of the American and the British decision to attacked Iraq and engaged into war is legitimate. In the inquiry of people in the website of Noam Chompsky one question goes like this: "Do you think that, after the unjustified and unjustifiable war against Iraq, the world will lose the meaning of its existence, like in the field of language, when we lose the grammatical rules Will we automatically lose the reference of the meaning of sentences, and consequently the meaning of the world around us" Noam answer this question by citing one statement done by a follower of the Iraq war, Michael Glennon, who argues that we should recognize that international law and international institutions are what he calls hot air. They have proven their inapplicability by the fact that the United States disregards them, and he says it is right to disregard them, and the United States must maintain the right to use force as it chooses, independent of these institutions, which we simply have to dismiss and disregard. The act of Americans and British against Iraq has gain criticism throughout the world. But the said act is legitimate. The legality of attacking someone is not being followed especially during the time of war or the need to have a war. In the case of the American President he needs to make decisions depending on the