Co-editors: Georges Affaki, Horacio Grigera Naon.
The choice of jurisdiction is one of the most important provisions of a contract. The jurisdiction clause determines the national Court, and its rules of conflict, or the arbitral tribunal, whose role will be to give effect to the parties’ agreement on the substance and on the applicable law. Written by arbitrators, academics and practitioners, this dossier addresses the multiple challenges facing the jurisdiction clause through an expert in-depth comparison of syndromes and proposed solutions in both arbitration and court proceedings.
- Are asymmetrical jurisdiction clauses enforceable?
- What is the proper law for the arbitration clause?
- What occurs in countries where the validity of the arbitration agreement is determined pursuant to a substantive approach rather than one of conflict of laws?
- Is there a risk that The Hague Convention on choice of court agreements will create a conflict with the current substantive law and increase ex ante uncertainty?
These challenging questions and many others in relation to the effectiveness of jurisdictional choices are covered in this Dossier.