Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-68ccn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-12T04:20:12.335Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Private Parties and the Permanent Court of Arbitration

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 July 2009

Pieter Sanders
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

As early as 1952 I launched the idea of enhancing the use of the PCA by making its arbitration facilities accessible for arbitration between states and private parties. A few years later I was requested by the Secretary-General, at that time, Prof. Francois, to draw up draft arbitration rules for this purpose. These rules, as elaborated by the International Bureau of the PCA, became the 1962 Rules of Arbitration and Conciliation for Settlement of International Disputes between Two Parties of Which Only One is a State, hereafter referred to as the 1962 Rules.

Type
Articles
Information
Leiden Journal of International Law , Volume 6 , Issue 2: Special Issue 1993: THE FLAME REKINDLED: New Hopes for International Arbitration , August 1993 , pp. 289 - 295
Copyright
Copyright © Foundation of the Leiden Journal of International Law 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. De toekomst van het Permanente Hof van Arbitrage (The future of the PCA), 384 Arbitrate Rechtspraak 353–359 (1952).

2. These Rules are reproduced in the 1991 publication of PCA's International Bureau, The Permanent Court of Arbitration – New Directions, as Annex 3, at 45–54.

3. For the period 1902 until World War II, 23 arbitration cases appear on the list published as Annex 3 to the PCA's Annual Report 1991. For the period following World War II until the present-time, four more cases are reported. In addition the Annual Report 1991 refers to four International Commissions of Inquiry (Annex 4) and three International Conciliation Commissions (Annex 5).

4. 4 I.L.M. XXVI 780 (July 1992).

5. See the publication mentioned in note 2.

6. On the work of the Expert Group, see also Bleich's contribution in this Special Issue, 215.

7. For types of disputes dealt with in these arbitrations see the arbitral awards published regularly in the 18 volumes of ICCA's Yearbook Commercial Arbitration 1976–1993.

8. Craig, Park and Paulsson in ICC Arbitration (2nd ed. 1990), at 8.

9. Cour de Cassation, May 2, 1966 in the Galakis case, 533 RCDIP (1967), with note by Goldman.

10. See the publication mentioned in note 2, at 55 under Submission Clause.

11. ICC Bulletin June 1991 reported that, while it received per year over 300 arbitration requests, requests for conciliation under its Rules amount to no more than 5–10 per year.

12. For the manner in which the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules have been adapted by the IRAN-US Claims Tribunal and have been applied by the Tribunal, see Van Hof, Commentary on the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules – Their Application by the Iran-US Claims Tribunal, published by Kluwer in cooperation with the T.M.C. Asser Institute, 1991, XIV, 369 pp.