Recently, focus has been brought upon the use of international arbitration to solve human rights abuses caused by businesses (“BHR Arbitration“). Disputes involving human rights violations often occur between parties of unequal financial means and commercial sophistication, and in countries which cannot offer an efficient and free from corruption judicial system. Arbitration has the potential to represent a valid remedy when judicial proceedings are not available or efficient, offering a neutral forum free from political pressures, impartial judges with expertise in human rights selected by the parties, procedural flexibility, greater efficiency and near-universal recognition as a result of the New York Convention.
by Carolina Apolo Roque, Trainee Lawyer at CMS Portugal
With as many as nine identified approaches to the potential applicable law to the arbitration agreement, Marc Blessing, as an experienced author, arbitrator and lawyer, could not help but ask: “Are we thus faced with a magnificent confusion?” (“The Law Applicable to the Arbitration Clause” 1999, in Improving the Efficiency of Arbitration Agreements and Awards: 40 Years of Application of the New York Convention, ICCA Congress Series 9). This post focuses on the approach that would most likely be followed in an international arbitration seated in Portugal, shedding light on where it stands in this magnificent confusion.
Amanda is an independent arbitrator and a Consultant at Seymours, based in London. Her practice focuses on international commercial arbitration, domestic and international commercial litigation and Privy Council appellate procedure.
Her experience includes disputes arising in relation to a variety of sectors, including the recycling, construction, automotive and finance sectors. She has acted and participated in international and domestic arbitrations conducted on an ad hoc basis and under institutional rules.