Дисертації з теми "Arbitration Seat"

Parties to international commercial transactions choose to refer potential disputes to arbitration instead of litigation for different reasons. In most of the cases an important factor for a decision in favour of arbitration is that they want to have a potential dispute settled quickly. Even if the dispute resolution through arbitration is often speedier than court proceedings, it still takes a fair amount of time until a final award is rendered. Thus, it might become necessary to obtain interim measures to regulate the terms of an ongoing relationship for the duration of the arbitral proceedings, to stabilize matters on a provisional basis or to avoid frustration of the final award. If the need for interim measure arises, the concerned party will be confronted with a bundle of complex legal and tactical questions. The second chapter deals with the question which judicial authority has jurisdiction to order interim measures in international arbitral proceedings conducted in Switzerland, respectively with the legislative and contractual framework that must be considered in order to determine the competent authority. As will be explained, arbitral tribunals and state courts may have concurrent jurisdiction to order interim measures and thus, the parties will have to decide which authority to apply to. To determine which possibility will be more advantageous in the concrete circumstances they have to compare the two options. Thus, the third chapter is concerned with interim measures available to arbitral tribunals, whereas the fourth chapter deals with those available to state courts. In these two chapters the focus is particularly on the variety of interim measures, some procedural aspects and on questions with regard to enforcement. In chapter five some selected questions and problems caused by the concurrent jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal and the state court will be addressed. I will conclude with the question whether or not one can determine a general rule that it is more advantageous for parties to international arbitration to address either the state court or the arbitral tribunal with a request for interim measure.

Is the choice of the arbitral seat still an important decision in international arbitration? Should arbitral awards be subject to greater judicial scrutiny? Should the appeal be in international arbitration? Is it possible that an annulled arbitral award is recognized under the New York Convention? Should the New York Convention be amended to achieve CNY 2.0? Is investment arbitration a system that works? Are the criticisms of investment arbitration valid? In this interview, Gary Born responds to each of these questions by addressing many controversial current issues in international arbitration.
¿Es la elección de la sede del arbitraje todavía una decisión importante en el arbitraje internacional? ¿Deberían los laudos estar sometidos a un mayor escrutinio judicial? ¿Debería existir la apelación en el arbitraje internacional? ¿Es posible que en virtud de la Convención de Nueva York se reconozca un laudo anulado? ¿Debería enmendarse la Convención de Nueva York para lograr una CNY 2.0? ¿Es el arbitraje de inversiones un sistema que funciona? ¿Son las críticas al arbitraje de inversiones válidas? En la presente entrevista, Gary Born responde cada una de estas interrogantes tratando muchos temas polémicos de actualidad en el arbitraje internacional.

Esta dissertação almeja contemporizar o estudo da arbitragem com as novidades tecnológicas advindas dos avanços constantes da informática. A dissertação é dividida em oito capítulos, sendo cada um excetuados o introdutório e o conclusivo dedicado a enfrentar uma questão relativa ao campo de estudo selecionado. Os temas abordados são: (i) Convenção arbitral eletrônica; (ii) Sede da arbitragem virtual; (iii) Questões jurídicas advindas de um procedimento informatizado; (iv) O documento eletrônico como fonte de prova; (v) O computador como perito ou expert witness; e (vi) A sentença arbitral eletrônica. Na conclusão final é salientada a compatibilidade das novas tecnologias com a arbitragem, recomendando-se, no entanto, uma adaptação cultural dos usuários da arbitragem e das normas que regem esse meio de solução de controvérsias.
This dissertation seeks to bring the study of arbitration up to speed with the constant innovations that take place in the realm of computer technology. The dissertation is split into eight chapters with each chapter, short of the first and last, dedicated to handling a question related to the field of study. The topics analyzed herein are: (i) Electronic arbitral clause; (ii) Seat of the virtual arbitration; (iii) Judicial quandaries resulting from high-tech procedures; (iv) The e-document as a source of evidence; (v) The computer as a judicial assistant or expert witness; and (vi) The electronic arbitral award. In the final conclusion emphasis is given to the compatibility between these novel technologies and arbitration, despite an adaptation of both the cultural and legal background that permeate this method of dispute resolution being recommendable.

Are the criti cisms to investment arbitrati on valid?. Is the annulment acti on an indispensable mechanism?. Can the acts of ius imperium of the States be submitted to arbitration?.This round table respond to each of these questi ons by addressing many controversial issues in itnernati onal arbitration.
¿Son válidas las críti cas al arbitraje de inversiones?. ¿Es el recurso de anulación un mecanismo indispensable?. ¿Pueden los actos de ius imperium de los Estados ser someti dos a arbitraje?.La presente mesa redonda, responde a cada una de estas interrogantes, tratando muchos temas controversiales en el arbitraje internacional.

Arbitration as an alternative method of settling dispute. The development of Arbitration Law in England. The Arbitration Act 1996 versus the UNCITRAL Model Law: an objective and comparative analysis. Recent trends in International Commercial Arbitration: an empirical analysis.

The dynamics of our globalised world open the way for international trade and transactions between different countries; this may lead to conflicts in laws where transactions and trade may be subject to different legal systems. One of the biggest issues in international commercial law is disputes over the charging of interest, for example with regard to late payment, interest-based loans, or compensation for damages. Interest disputes are considered to be a complex area of law and even more complex in the international field. At the international level, interest claims may be connected to many areas of commerce and thus governed by various laws, which are different from one country to another; moreover, each country has its own interest rate and such rates are changeable according to the nature of law and economics under some jurisdictions. Furthermore, the concept of interest itself is affected by influences such as religious beliefs and economic, political and cultural trends. Interest can be treated as a substantive or a procedural matter. The settlement of these disputes therefore faces difficulties. Arbitration, as a method for settlement of disputes, is characterised by special features that assist in resolving these issues; but it faces some obstructions, especially in international commercial arbitration. The practices of arbitral tribunals and national courts in this regard are different. The results of different interpretations, approaches, and theories with regard to arbitration, at the pre-arbitration, during arbitration and post-arbitration stages, may also differ widely due to the diversity of financial and legal systems such as Common Law, Civil Law and the Islamic legal system – Sharia Law – across different countries. Each legal system has a different methodology and theories, even within an individual country under one legal system, and a state within a federal system has its own laws, which may have different interpretations in this respect. The New York Convention of 1958 on enforcing foreign arbitral awards was established in favour of arbitral awards and for the purpose of unifying international rules of arbitration. This Convention provides some procedural and substantive rules for the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards, but also provides some grounds for refusal. These rules have been affected by different interpretations under different jurisdictions and legal systems, which lead to different perspectives on the matter of charging interest and settlement by arbitration. The outcome of applying the NYC under these interpretations often has the opposite of its intended effect: the rejection of foreign arbitral awards. Due to such ambiguities, courts occasionally intervene in arbitration in all its stages. The interventions of national courts occur in three stages: enforcement of the arbitration agreement, enforcement of the contract under the applicable law to the agreement, and enforcement of the foreign arbitral award. The confusion between substantive and procedural laws also creates confusion with respect to public policy, non-arbitrability and enforceability. In addition, there may be a lack of clarity on the scope of arbitration with respect to the parties’ agreement, whether or not the parties have agreed to the interest rates and periods and whether or not they have agreed to the authority of the arbitrator. These issues affect the enforceability of an arbitration agreement, the law applicable to the disputed contract, the freedom of parties, the authority of the arbitrators and the enforceability of the awarded interest. The thesis studies how arbitral awards containing interest have been interpreted across the three aforementioned legal systems under the NYC 1958 in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the UAE, England, France, and the US and the enforceability of such awards.

En matière internationale, le tribunal arbitral n’a d’autre choix que de se fixer sur le territoire d’un État afin de rendre sa sentence. Le choix de cet « État hôte » emporterait alors fixation du siège de l’arbitrage international. Mais quel choix faire ? Comment ? Par qui ? Que faire en cas d’incertitude dans ce choix ? Quels effets cette fixation aura-t-elle ensuite lors de la création du tribunal, du rendu et de l’exécution de sa sentence, ou encore du choix des lois applicables ? Il n’est pas une réponse unique à ces simples questions. Pour cause, le droit de l’arbitrage international accorde une importance variable à la notion de siège. En ce sens, elle dépendra principalement de la vision que l’on a de la place et de la source de l’arbitrage vis-à-vis de la justice étatique. C’est par l’étude des différents courants de pensée philosophique, retenus par l’un ou l’autre des courants doctrinaux, qu’il sera possible d’expliquer les différentes représentations qui existent au sein de la communauté juridique internationale de la notion du «siège de l’arbitrage». Aussi, ce manuscrit amène-t-il in fine à de profonds questionnements sur la source de la juridicité d’une sentence arbitrale internationale. Plus l’on considèrera que la sentence puise sa source dans l’ordonnancement juridique de l’État dans lequel se situe le tribunal, plus l’on verra l’arbitrage et l’arbitre faire partie intégrante de cet ordonnancement, et plus alors le droit du siège aura de prise sur le déroulement du processus arbitral, l’organisation du tribunal et la vie de la sentence. Ainsi, après l’étude des différentes conceptions philosophiques de l’arbitrage puis des représentations du siège s’y rattachant – étude au passage de laquelle il sera constaté une révolution de la théorie dominante, passant d’un modèle territorial à un modèle délocalisé (évolution qui sera perceptible à travers une analyse comparée des lois d’arbitrage de différents pays) – une analyse des conséquences résultant d’un impact plus ou moins fort de ce siège sur le processus arbitral amènera à un constat flagrant. Quelle que soit la théorie du siège de l’arbitrage envisagée, ce dernier fait l’objet d’un net recul dans sa prise en compte de l’application de ses lois de procédure ou de fond.Néanmoins, bien que régulièrement battue en brèche par la doctrine internationale, la notion de siège n’en demeure pas moins persistante. Ce constat sera particulièrement marqué lors de la recherche de l’actuelle utilité du siège dans sa mission d’assistance au tribunal arbitral (c-à-d : appel au juge d’appui). Seulement, les visions des États sur l’arbitrage n’étant pas identiques, une analyse des lois et de la pratique arbitrale de certains pays amènera à douter de la répartition actuelle du contrôle des sentences opérées par la Convention de New York de 1958 entre le pays du siège et les pays d’accueil de l’arbitrage. L’interprétation de cette Convention conduit en effet à être actuellement le prétexte d’un affrontement indirect des visions de l’arbitrage international des États, sur l’importance du concept du siège de l’arbitrage international. L’actualité de cette question interrogera alors de manière légitime la pertinence actuelle de la notion du siège arbitral comme élément clé d’une lecture de l’arbitrage international
In international matters, the arbitral tribunal has no choice but to settle in the territory of a State in order to render its award. The choice of this "host State" would then determine the seat of international arbitration. But what choice do we make? How? By whom ? What to do in case of uncertainty of this choice? What effects will this determination then have in creating the tribunal, in rendering and enforcing its award, or in choosing the applicable laws? There is no single answer to these simple questions. Indeed, international arbitration law attaches varying importance to the notion of seat, in the sense that it will depend primarily on one's vision of the place and source of arbitration in relation to state justice. It is through the study of various philosophical thoughts, used by different academic point of views, that it will prove possible to explain the diversified representations that exist within the international legal community of the notion of "arbitration seat". Thus, this manuscript raises complex questions about the source of the juridicity of an international arbitral award. Indeed, the more the award is considered to have its source in the legal order of the State in which the tribunal is located, the more arbitration and arbitrators will be seen to be an integral part of that order, and more the law of the seat will have influence on the conduct of the arbitral process, the organization of the tribunal and the award. Therefore, after the study of the different philosophical conceptions of arbitration and the representations of the seat attached to it - a study in which it will be noted a revolution of the dominant theory, passing from a territorial model to a delocalized model (evolution which will be perceptible through a comparative analysis of the laws of arbitration countries) - an analysis of the consequences resulting from a more or less strong impact of this seat on the arbitral process will lead to a clear observation. Whatever the theory of the seat of the arbitration considered, it can be seen a decline in of the application of its procedural or substantive laws.Nevertheless, although the concept of the seat is regularly demolished by international doctrine, it remains persistent. This observation will be particularly obvious during the study of the current utility of the seat in its support to the arbitral tribunal (i.e. help of the juge d’appui). However, since States' views on arbitration are not identical, a survey of the laws and arbitration practice in a number of countries raises doubts about the current distribution of the control of awards under the 1958 New York Convention between the country of the seat and the other countries. The interpretation of this Convention is indeed a pretext for an indirect confrontation of the visions of international arbitration by States, through the concept of the seat of international arbitration. The topicality of this question will then legitimately interrogate the current relevance of the notion of the arbitral seat as a key element of international arbitration

O tema proposto para o presente estudo gravitou ao redor da relação arbitragem e execução no direito brasileiro. A primeira parte dedicou-se ao estudo da arbitragem e da convenção de arbitragem e da sentença arbitral, de modo a situar o tema, destacando as principais características que acabam por refletir no tema da execução. Após, foi analisada a execução da sentença arbitral, nacional e estrangeira, bem como a possibilidade de ser proferida a sentença arbitral parcial e como se dá sua execução. Ademais, verificou-se a necessidade de prévia homologação da sentença arbitral estrangeira para que possa ser executada no país. Ato contínuo, demonstrou-se a execução de medidas liminares concedidas pelo árbitro e a possibilidade do árbitro determinar medidas de apoio de natureza coercitiva. Também, analisou-se a sentença arbitral ilíquida e a necessidade do procedimento de liquidação antes de sua execução perante o Poder Judiciário. Em um terceiro momento dedicou-se a análise dos meios de defesa do executado na execução da sentença arbitral e demais formas de impugnação desta, notadamente a ação anulatória. Verificou-se a possibilidade de a impugnação ser utilizada como meio de anulação da sentença, desde que respeitado o prazo decadencial de noventa dias estabelecido na lei, o que também é aplicado no caso de execução de sentença parcial. Posteriormente, analisouse a execução do título executivo extrajudicial em que foi previsto convenção de arbitragem, concluindo-se pela impossibilidade do uso dos embargos do devedor para discussão do mérito e a necessidade de instauração da arbitragem.
The theme proposed for this study revolves around the relationship between arbitration and enforcement under Brazilian law. The first part was dedicated to the study of arbitration and arbitration agreements and of arbitral awards, so as to set the bases for this dissertation, highlighting the main characteristics that eventually have reflections in enforcement. Afterwards, the enforcement of national and foreign arbitral awards was analysed, along with the possibility of rendering partial awards and how their enforcement is carried out. Furthermore, the necessity of recognising a foreign award prior to its enforcement in Brazil was acknowledged. Subsequently, the enforcement of preliminary measures granted by arbitrators and the possibility of an arbitrator granting coercive and supportive measures were demonstrated. In addition to that, awards passed with no fixed amount and the necessity of the fixation of such amount prior to their enforcement in court were analysed. In its third stage, this dissertation was dedicated to reviewing defence mechanisms for the debtor in proceedings for the enforcement of arbitral awards and further objections thereto, namely the motion to set aside arbitral award. The possibility of the objection to enforcement be utilised as a setting aside mechanism was confirmed, as long as the limitation period of ninety days set forth in law is observed, which is also applied to the enforcement of partial awards. Eventually, the enforcement of extrajudicial deeds in which an arbitration clause is inserted was analysed, and the conclusion was that the filing of a motion to stay enforcement in order to discuss the merits of the case was found to be inadmissible, as in that scenario, initiating arbitral proceedings is necessary.

This thesis examines the process applied by international tribunals for delimiting Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and continental shelf boundaries under international law. Maritime delimitation is governed by articles 74 and 83 of the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which are customary international law. However, owing to the vagueness of such legal provisions, international tribunals have been developing a standard process for delimiting maritime boundaries. The delimitation process has evolved significantly since the 1969 judgment of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in North Sea Continental Shelf. The ICJ re-stated this process in its 2009 Black Sea judgment as being constituted of three stages: first, an equidistance line is provisionally drawn; second, this line is adjusted should relevant circumstances so require; third, the overall equitableness of the boundary is evaluated by assessing the proportionality between the length of the relevant coast and the marine areas appertaining to each state. This thesis analyses each stage of the delimitation process as re-stated in Black Sea. By way of introduction, chapter 1 outlines the relevant legal provisions and the historical evolution of the delimitation process through the jurisprudence of international tribunals. Chapter 2 discusses both the notions of the relevant coast and of the relevant area, and the practical methods for their identification. Since Black Sea, international tribunals have tended to identify the relevant coast and the relevant area prior to establishing a provisional equidistance line. Chapter 3 discusses the issues concerning the drawing of the provisional equidistance line. Chapter 4 examines relevant circumstances and the methods for adjusting an equidistance line. Chapter 5 discusses proportionality. Using doctrinal legal research methodologies, this thesis aims to assess the degree of consistency in the international tribunals’ application of the three-stage delimitation process. It argues that, while great leaps forward have been made since 1969, there is still a number of unresolved issues, in relation to which this thesis endeavours to provide some workable solutions.

Cette étude porte sur la question de l’efficacité de la convention d’arbitrage à l’égard des opérateurs du transport maritime de marchandises. Dans un premier temps, la question qui se pose est celle de la détermination du droit applicable à l’efficacité de ladite clause. A cet égard, notre attention se concentre sur l’interprétation et l’application des principes propres à l’arbitrage international par la jurisprudence maritime. L’examen des clauses d’arbitrage insérées dans un contrat de transport maritime ne saurait échapper aux spécificités du droit de transport maritime ainsi qu’aux dispositions des conventions maritimes internationales. Par ailleurs, l’approche du sujet par la méthode comparative nous permettra de découvrir, à travers les solutions concrètes finalement retenues dans les trois systèmes juridiques en question, que l’effet juridique de la clause compromissoire est directement lié à l a position contractuelle de ces opérateurs. Parmi les personnes impliquées dans le transport maritime, le destinataire des marchandises nous intéresse plus particulièrement. Ce dernier n’étant pas présent, en effet, au moment de la formation du contrat, les conditions de son engagement par une clause compromissoire insérée, presque toujours « par référence » dans le titre de transport, font l’objet d’un vif débat doctrinal et jurisprudentiel
This study is primarily focused on the enforceability of arbitration agreements incorporated in contracts of carriage of goods by sea. First, we will cover the important issue of determining the law applicable to these arbitration agreements. Special attention will be given to how courts tend to implement general international arbitration principles to maritime disputes. An arbitration agreement incorporated in acontract of carriage of goods by sea should also be analyzed in light of the specificities of maritime transport law and applicable international shipping conventions. Moreover, the comparative methodology used herein will show that the enforceability of arbitration agreements is closely related to the qualification of the operators involved in the contract. In particular, among the commercial players involved in the carriage of the goods, we sought to examine the legal position of the consignee of the goods. Indeed, since the consignee is absent at the moment of the contract formation, the binding effect there upon of the arbitration agreement, which is generally incorporated “by reference” to the bill of lading, is highly debated by scholars and judges

La délimitation des frontières maritimes revêt une importance capitale pour un grand nombre États, que cela soit d’un oint de vue symbolique, culturel, stratégique ou économique. Néanmoins, le droit international conventionnel reste au mieux largement ambigu, au pire entièrement silencieux sur la question de savoir quelles sont les méthodes précises pour résoudre les éventuels différends entre États pouvant surgir lors de la délimitation de leurs espaces maritimes. Face à ces ambiguïtés et silences conventionnels et face aussi à une pratique étatique incohérente et dépourvue d’une opinio juris, c’est principalement dans leur propre vision que les juridictions internationales ont puisé la règle de l’équidistance/circonstances pertinentes, en vertu de laquelle toute délimitation maritime décidée, quel que soit l’espace maritime considéré, y inclus le plateau continental étendu, et quelle que soit la configuration côtière, débute par la construction d’une ligne d’équidistance provisoire. Cette ligne pourra éventuellement être modifiée pour tenir compte descirconstances particulières de chaque affaire dans une deuxième phase de la délimitation. En dépit de la consécration claire et – une première dans l’histoire de la CIJ – unanime de la règle de l’équidistance/circonstances pertinentes dans l’affaire de la Délimitation maritime en mer Noire en 2009, de nombreuses zones d’ombre et difficultés d’ordre technique existent dans sa mise en œuvre pratique par les cours et tribunaux internationaux, notamment en ce qui concerne le risque d’une part trop importante de subjectivité, voire d’arbitraire, particulièrement en ce qui concerne le choix des points de base et le rôle joué par la proportionnalité. De même, afin de garantir une « matérialisation » efficace de la frontière maritime décidée sur le « terrain », une collaboration étroite entre le juriste d’une part et le cartographe, l’hydrographe, le géologue et le géographe d’autre part s’impose
The delimitation of maritime boundaries is of utmost importance for many states, whether on a symbolic, cultural, strategic or economic level. Nevertheless, international treaty law is at best largely ambiguous, at worst entirely silent as to what the precise methods for resolving possible disputes that might surface during the delimitation process are. Confrontedwith these ambiguities and silences, but also with incoherent state practice devoid of any opinio juris, it is primarily from their own vision that international jurisdictions have drawn the equidistance/relevant circumstances rule, according to which, regardless of the maritime zone concerned, including the extended continental shelf, and regardless of the coastalconfiguration, every decided maritime delimitation begins with the establishment of a provisional equidistance line. This line can later be modified in a second phase of the delimitation to take into account the particular circumstances of each case. In spite of the unequivocal and – a premiere in the history of the Court – unanimous consecration of theequidistance/relevant circumstances rule by the ICJ in the Delimitation in the Black Sea case in 2009, numerous unsettled areas and technical difficulties remain in the delimitation process, notably regarding the risk of too great a degree of subjectivity, if not arbitrariness, particularly regarding the choice of the base points and the role to be played by proportionality. Likewise, in order to guarantee a smooth “materialisation” of the border on the “ground”, a close collaboration between the jurist on the one hand and the cartographer, geologist, hydrologist and geographer on the other hand is indispensable

L’outre-mer comprend des régions, des pays et des territoires aux statuts divers et au passé hérité en grande partie des grandes puissances européennes, ce qui les a placés dans une communauté d’intérêts avec les Etats auxquels ils sont rattachés mais aussi avec l’Union européenne (UE).Néanmoins, ces régions, pays et territoires n’ont eu cesse de reconstruire entre eux des liens historiques et culturels et de tisser des relations avec l’ensemble de l’outre-mer afin de présenter une cohérence d’ensemble dans leur négociation avec l’Union européenne.Les régions ultrapériphériques appliquent le droit communautaire tandis que les pays et territoires d’outre-mer, situés en dehors du territoire communautaire, connaissent un régime d’association avec l’Union européenne.Le Danemark, l’Espagne, la France, les Pays-Bas, le Portugal et le Royaume-Uni ont procédé aux réformes constitutionnelles autorisant de multiples évolutions statutaires dans le respect du droit à l’autodétermination des populations.Forts d’une évolution statutaire et d’un développement économique et social continu, les régions, pays et territoires d’outre-mer souhaitent maintenant faire valoir leurs droits et défendre leurs intérêts au niveau européen et sur la scène internationale.La globalisation des politiques les incite à se regrouper au sein d’institutions internationales. Le rattachement de ces territoires à des Etats de droit leur a ouvert la voie à des systèmes juridiques bien structurés mais aussi aux valeurs européennes. Leur ultrapériphérité les a placés dans une situation géopolitique qui les a fait accéder aux relations internationales.L’objet de cette thèse est de démontrer l’interdépendance entre ces différents ordres juridiques et l’influence du droit européen et du droit international sur l’évolution statutaire de l’outre-mer vers davantage d’autonomie, mais aussi de responsabilisation et de prise en charge de son développement au moyen d’une implication dans son environnement régional, d’une coopération inter-régionale ou transnationale et d’une participation aux travaux des organisations internationales
The Overseas regions, countries and territories present various statuses inherited mainly from the major European Powers which placed them in a relationship of a common interest not only with their mother countries but also with the European Union (EU).However, these territories have continuously re-built between them historical and cultural links, and weaved relationship within the entire Overseas to appear as a constituted whole while negotiating with the EU.The outermost regions (OR) apply Community Law while the Overseas Countries and territories (OCT) situated outside the territory of the Community, have Association Arrangements with the EU.Denmark, France, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain and United Kingdom have proceeded to necessary constitutional reforms to allow numerous articles amendments in respect of right to self-determination of peoples.At the light of statutory amendments and of a continuous economic and social development, the Outermost regions (OR) and the Overseas Countries and Territories (OCT), now wish to assert their rights and to defend their interests at European and International level.Globalisation of policies encourages OR and OCT to gather within International bodies. The rule of law of the related countries opens them to well-structured legal systems and to European values. The outermost geopolitical localisation makes them to have access to international relations.The purpose of this thesis is to demonstrate the interdependence between these different legal systems and the impact of European and International Law on the statutory amendments of the Overseas towards more autonomy, but also liabilities and involvement on their own development by using their regional environment, inter-regional and transnational cooperation and taking part at the works of international organisations

The diploma thesis on Arbitration procedure within international business transactions focuses on the place of arbitration procedure and its relation to the national system of law. The first chapter is concerned with the dispute resolutions within international business transactions. The thesis characterises the alternative dispute resolutions and defines the term of arbitration procedure within international business transactions. The basic characteristics thereof are specified and the theories which attempt to explain nature of arbitration are described - contractual, jurisdictional, mixed and autonomy theory. The term of the place of arbitration is defined in the second chapter as the real place situated in the territory of a particular state. This place is distinguished from the arbitration seat and from other terms which used to be confused with the place of arbitration. The arbitration seat is deemed to represent legal domicile of the arbitration. The system of law of the seat determines the legal regime of arbitration procedure. The thesis further describes two main theories dealing with the relation between the place of arbitration and the national system of law - seat theory and delocalization theory. The relation between the place of arbitration and the national system of law is also...

碩士
國立臺灣海洋大學
海洋法律研究所
103
In 2008, the Rotterdam Rules completed the integration of international carriage of goods by sea in which the regulations of arbitration are clearly stated. Apart from the previous Hamburg Rules in 1978, the Rotterdam Rules again clarified the rules of arbitration and at the same time added several regulations related to the international maritime conventions. The thesis emphasizes on the influences the Rotterdam Rules has caused to Taiwan as well as the comparison among the related regulations in Taiwan and other countries. Chapter 2 is the introduction of the conception of arbitration. Chapter 3 discusses about the rules of arbitration agreements of carriages by sea, especially focusing on the designation of the Rotterdam Rules and the related rules and their practice in Taiwan. What’s more, the comparison of jurisdiction and applicable law between Taiwan and other countries are made in Chapter 4 along with the comparison of place of arbitration in the Rotterdam Rules and the related regulations in Taiwan. Finally, chapter 5 focuses on the decision of the arbitral tribunal and the impact the arbitrators’ decisions make. Chapter 6 is the conclusion of the previous chapters, and it mentions that it’s necessary to modify the regulations of arbitration in maritime carriage by sea in Taiwan.

碩士
國立政治大學
外交學系戰略與國際事務碩士在職專班
107
After the arbitral tribunal pursuant to Annex VII of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea announced the Philippine South China Sea Arbitration Awards No. 2013-19 on July 12, 2016, it has aroused severe criticism by the governments and scholars from R.O.C. and P.R.C. However, should the ruling has received recognitions from the foreign academic society and international judicial regime, it will lead future judgements and influence the interests of states around the South China Sea. By analyzing the applicability of foreign scholars, international judicial precedence and state practices, this thesis tries to verify the suitability of the Arbitration regarding the issues of historical rights and island disputes. It is also based on the evidence submitted by the governments of China and Philippines, as well as the Amicus Curiae by the Chinese(Taiwan) Society of International Law, trying to analyzes the evidence evaluation by the Arbitration, and then proposes the strategy of future response to litigation.

碩士
國立臺灣海洋大學
海洋法律研究所
106
Abstract This article first elaborates on the sovereignty of the of the South China Sea and its claims. To explore international arbitration: rights and obligations under general, regional or bilateral agreements and to mediate conflicts between States to settle disputes. On the history of the history of the sea area of the case, to control the two sides of the South China Sea waters of the historical waters and the "U-shaped line" of the relevant research, and then on the cross-strait policy of the development of the South China Sea. South China Sea Arbitration Analysis: South China Sea Arbitration of the proposed timetable, the Philippines South Sea arbitration case on the cross-strait policy of the South China Sea, the subsequent development of arbitration results, China's South China Sea policy dilemma and response. And then explore the South China Sea dispute settlement mechanism and the possibility of cooperation, but the two sides of the South China Sea cooperation is the largest profits. The South China Sea is rich in oil, natural gas and a variety of mineral resources, it has become the waters of neighboring countries compete for. In recent years, the dispute over the South China Sea is mainly by the Philippine Parliament through the "territorial waters line bill", the Huangyan Island and the Nansha Islands part of the island reef is divided into Philippine territory. The Malaysian government submits to the Congress a continental shelf amendment bill as a legal basis for submitting EEZ and continental reefs to the United Nations. Making the South China Sea issue from the territorial and territorial disputes, evolved into marine resources and energy contention; the South China Sea dispute has become the fuse of Asia-Pacific security. Taiwan has sovereignty over the territory of the South China Sea. China's fishermen who have been fishing for a long time in the South China Sea have frequently suffered from illegal detention in the Philippines and Vietnam, not only harming the fishermen's economy in China, but also endangering the lives of fishermen, based on national interests and territorial sovereignty. The 1945 United Nations Charter gives States the obligation to settle peacefully with each other in an agreement with each other and the freedom to choose a peaceful solution to the dispute. In 1982, UNCLOS further recognized the norms of peaceful settlement of disputes under the Charter of the United Nations and, with respect to the principle of national sovereignty, specifically set out a set of dispute settlement provisions for the maintenance of the stability of the world's maritime law.

碩士
淡江大學
國際事務與戰略研究所碩士在職專班
107
Since 2013,China has continuously controlled land reclamation in the South China Sea, strengthened military construction, and completed civil and military aviation flight tests. Although the results of the July 2009 Hague International Permanent Court of Arbitration found that China violated Philippine sovereignty, but China would not back down and kept its stand. China military even continues to strengthen construction in the South China Sea including the installation of anti-ship and air to air missiles on 3 reefs. China seems to adopt a policy of softening for the ASEAN countries, trying to mend friendly relations with the countries around the South China Sea, but on the issue of principle, they still do not want to make concessions. China and Philippines also promoted the repair of the two countries after the outcome of the arbitration case was released, they even sign an agreement to jointly develop oil and gas in the South China Sea, but the Philippines still would not back down on the main issue in South China Sea. Although the United States is not a sovereign claimant of the South China Sea, it still advocates freedom of navigation in the South China Sea. The intention is to prevent coastal countries from over-marriage and challenge their maritime hegemony to ensure that their military could hold power around the world. China''s intensified construction on the South Island reef naturally caused US dissatisfaction in this case. China''s international moral image is still difficult for Southeast Asian countries to accept it as a regional leader, therefore South East Asia countries are hoping that the United States can maintain a certain strategic position and continue to carry out its mission of freedom of navigation to prevent China from achieving long-term and widespread summer in the South China Sea. However, as China’s diplomatic bargaining chips accumulate, the current situation in the region will face more Big challenge. In result, this article will explore the strategic background of the South China Sea dispute from the complicated issues of various countries, and help to understand how China formulates the South China Sea policy. Secondly, the Philippines will be separated to analyze the origin of the dispute between the Philippines and China in the South China Sea, and how to survive in the gap between the US and China. Finally, the discussion of influence between China and Philippines after the case of South China Sea arbitration

碩士
國防大學政治作戰學院
政治研究所
106
In January 2013, the Philippines submitted a "South China Sea Arbitration Case" to the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, based on China's maritime rights claims in the disputed waters of the China-Philippines in the South China Sea and the recent maritime law enforcement and island reef development activities. On July 12, 2016, the results of the arbitration were announced. It was pointed out that China's self-demarcation of the Jiuduan Line in the South China Sea and its sovereignty over the South China Sea is a violation of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. It also believes that China's exploitation of resources in some of the islands in Nansha is a violation of the Philippine sovereignty. The Philippine-Chinese relationship fell to a critical point at this time. At the time when the newly appointed President of the Philippines, Dutti, took office, President Duterte chose to shelve the decision of the International Arbitration Tribunal over the South China Sea dispute and change its tactics toward China. Sino-U.S. relations showed an opportunity to return to temperature. On October 20th, Duterte visited China and promoted the “Du Xihui” bilateral talks, which made Dutti’s foreign policy of “beyond the US pro-China” more prominent. If we interpret the Philippine changes in China’s tactics in terms of “no permanent friends, no permanent enemies, only eternal interests” in the world, after the current President Trump’s incumbent takes office, the Philippines’ Chinese policy will surely be adjusted. In order to meet the national interests of the Philippines, it will eventually also affect the situation in the South China Sea and the security situation in the Asia-Pacific. Keywords: South China Sea Arbitration, Philippines-China Relations, Duterte, National Interests, Situation in the South China Sea, Asia-Pacific Security Situation.

碩士
中央警察大學
水上警察研究所
105
Since the judgment of The South China Sea Arbitration was confirmed, the domestic public opinion ran high, and the standard of the arbitration court was questioned. The arbitrators didn’t seem to understand the real state of Itu Aba Fully. They believed what the Philippines said and handed out. In order to understand the case, we have to check the standard of the case and what the Philippines’ positions are . When it come to how to define islands, we must have a discussion about the regime of islands. We focus on 1982 the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, look over its legislative reason and analyze the element of the island and definition. After Understanding the definition of the island, we have a discussion about the right of the island and how we deal with the problem of overlapping the area among the countries, and what roles the island act, what the influence is and various factors we have to take into consideration. After understanding tentatively, we can carry on the discussion about the arbitrating case of the South China Sea. We will discuss the position of the Philippines, People’s republic of China and Republic of China, and how they prove the legal status of Itu Aba. The arbitral tribunal’s position is also important, which will influence how we define the legal status of an island. Itu Aba is judged as a rock, which means that Itu Aba doesn’t have its own exclusive economic zone and continental shelf, and that seriously infringes our country’s sovereignty right. So if Itu Aba is judged as an island, what will we obtain? For example, we can have our own exclusive economic zone and continental shelf, which provide us the right of managing and exploiting the petroleum and fisheries resources. Besides, the fast development of People’s republic of China make the countries around east and south-east Asia. What steps People’s republic of China will take is concerned by those countries. Lastly, like Itu Aba, Okinotorisima of Japan also has the same problem about its legal status. How it will be judged is probably influenced by the case of Itu Aba. So Okinotorisima of Japan is an island or a rock,which is worth thinking deeply. No matter how it’s defined, the result will have a huge impact on the area of Asia and the Pacific Ocean.

碩士
國立臺灣海洋大學
海洋法律研究所
104
The sovereignty dispute in the South China Sea has existed for a long time. Currently, the countries involved in the South China sea sovereignty dispute are: the Republic of China, the Chinese Communist Party, the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia and Brunei, all of which claim to have full or partial sovereignty over the islands and sea areas in the region. After the Huangyan Island incident, the Philippines proposed arbitration against China, officially elevating the South China Sea issue to be disputed via legal channels. Due to the arbitration, this also indirectly affect our position on the sovereignty of the South China Sea and lessens the legal status of our country's Taiping Island. With the Sino-Philippine sea arbitration case as the main subject, this paper explores the conflicts and influences over South China Sea islands sovereignty, and the use of relevant provisions within the United Nations Convention on the Law to explore the problems facing the South China Sea issues. In addition, this paper studies the legal status of our country’s Taiping Island, advocating objections to China-Philippine Arbitration to classify Taiping Island as a reef, and views that Taiping Island should actually be classified as an island and enjoy the relevant provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. The situational development in the South China Sea reflects the plight of Taiwan's diplomatic and national security. Due to the lack of formal diplomatic relations, Taiwan's policy on the South China Sea is not easy to promote in the region. The question of the South China Sea has in fact evolved into an international political issue. The neighboring countries are afraid of the expansion of armaments and political action by the Chinese Communist Party, and have no fear of our country, even ignoring the existence of our country. Therefore, regardless of international politics or economic perspective, how to best maximize the benefit in this adverse situation depends on the decisions of our country’s policies. This article believes that if our country wants to have a place on the issue in the South China Sea controversy, we must insist that the sovereignty of the South China Sea is within our country’s position, and any other country's actions and claim in the South China Sea must be agreed by our country. In addition, it is absolutely necessary to uphold the position of Taiping Island as an island in order to to avoid the island being classified as reef and the loss of our rights in the South China Sea. Only through these actions will our country not be excluded by other countries from South China Sea’s resources.

碩士
國立中興大學
法律學系碩士在職專班
106
The South China Sea arbitral award rendered by the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) in Hague has raised so many controversies that in the end it was abandoned by both parties, namely, the Philippines and the People’s Republic of China. While the contents of the award deserve critical analyses, it is also interesting to know how this long forgotten Non United Nations organization operates and contributes to international society. This thesis intends to explore PCA with special reference to the South China Sea arbitration. Its history, structure and functions are briefly introduced. Some of the notable cases are also mentioned as a proof of its “achievements” since its establishment. Then an analysis and criticisms of the South China Sea case are provided to demonstrate why the People’s Republic of China refused to accept it. Nor was it considered a fair judgment on the part of the Republic of China. It is argued that the reasoning provided by PCA based on the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea was largely flawed and one-sided since it failed to consider the ever-advancing technological factor. As a result, it was not even regarded as a significant victory by the Philippines. This case also shows that PCA’s popularity is not just declining, but also an unfavorable means of resolving disputes.

碩士
國立臺灣海洋大學
海洋法律研究所
106
The South China Sea is rich in resources and located in the transportation hubs between the Pacific Ocean and the Indian Ocean. The neighboring countries all want to transfer the South China Sea into the territorial sea of their country. Philippines submitted the dispute to arbitration on the grounds of the Huang-yan Island, and it was accepted and heard by the arbitral tribunal. Since the arbitration judgment of the South China Sea Arbitration Case was announced, public opinions have been magnified to examine the interests of the country, and Taiwan generally believes that the arbitration tribunal should not accept the South China Sea arbitration case from the beginning. Even it is accepted, all evidences should be considered. Except that there is no actual understanding of the actual conditions of Taiping Island, the judgment is judged only by adopting one-sided statement of Philippines. Therefore, for understanding the deduction of arbitration judgment, this study resaerch Philippines’ claims and the South China Sea Arbitration Case's criteria for determining the island to know The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea （UNCLOS）, Article 121 of the norms and history. This study is based on the historical facts of Taiping Island, and discussed with the regime of islands established in the 1982 "United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea", to observed its legislative reasons and analyzed the formation and definition of the island elements. After understanding the definition of islands, we will further explore the island’s rights to the seas and the island’s role, its influence, and various factors when it comes to the overlapping of maritime rights between countries. In accordance with the historical background and history of Article 121 of the 1982 UNCLOS, the South China Sea arbitration case was reviewed. However, Taiping Island is not a dispute point in the South China Sea arbitration case. The arbitral tribunal made a comprehensive interpretation in the arbitration judgment. In the judgment, Taiping Island was identified as a rock reef and could not enjoy the rights of exclusive economic sea areas and continental reefs. This arbitration judgment has seriously affected Taiwan’s right to exercise Taiping Island. What is the legal status of Taiping Island ? It mainly involves the concept of uncertainty in natural resources, navigational rights and island regime . On the legal level, the regime of islands has been clearly explained in the South China Sea arbitration case, which can clarify the issue of island controversy that has been controversial for a long time. On the political level, natural resources are related to the development of the country and the extension of sovereignty. Taiwan advocates the historical rights of the South China Sea. The sovereignty and legal status of the South China Sea resources and islands and reefs are of considerable legal and political significance to Taiwan. China also claims sovereignty with historic rights. After the South China Sea arbitration case was announced, The attitudes and circumstances with China, Philippines and other neighboring countries regarding the South China Sea arbitration case will affect the stability of the East Asia region. This study puts forward Taiwan’s practice on Taiping Island through the reaction and impact of the United States, the Philippines, and China on the South China Sea arbitration case.

碩士
國防大學
戰略研究所
105
The South China Sea had became one of hot spots of global conflict, except of historical disputes and geographical characteristics, the main reason is derived from its value and importance. It causes decades of controversy, and even lead to military conflict. When States compete for the interests of the South China Sea, they according to the international law and the law of the sea as the basis for rationalization of their claims and enhance the legitimacy of their behavior. However, due to the tremendous economic interests of the South China Sea region, as well as the sound of the internal political considerations, making the parties are not willing to seek for solutions through judicial or arbitration. Various factors made the dispute more complicated in South China Sea, and increased the difficulty of the way through the international law to resolve disputes. The 2012 Huangyan Island incident triggered a conflict between China and the Philippines, it prompted the Philippines decide to propose international arbitration under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. After the commencement of the case, the PRC adopted various means to highlight its sovereignty. However, due to the PRC treated it indifference on the argument and legal struggle of international law, the legal team of the Philippines was able to win the arbitration under the carefully crafted litigation strategy, causing the PRC’s basic claim of the "Nine-dashed Line" was denied.. But, because of the international anarchy, there is no mechanism beyond the states or the powers to implement the ruling which can execute the result of the arbitration, so that the PRC is able to continue adhering its claim and expansion operations in the South China Sea. After the arbitration, all claimant countries have shown goodwill to the PRC, the maintenance of the international rule of law is not the primary concern for all countries. The pursuit of interest is the most important factor in the state's decision-making strategy. The ideal of liberalism is still difficult to break through the framework of realism.

碩士
國立臺灣海洋大學
海洋法律研究所
106
On 22 January 2013, the Republic of Philippines initiated the case "The South China Sea Arbitration" against People’s Republic of China under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea to the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA). On 12 July 2016, the PCA has issued the "Award." Although Republic of China (as Taiwan) is not even a party in the case, however it was still involved. The Philippines sought a ruling on against claims to historic rights within Nine-dash Line (U-Shaped Line) and the legal status of Itu Aba (Taiping Island), biggest feature in Spratly Islands. During the proceedings, assertions made by Taiwan and the unique status of ROC have been noticed by PCA and the Philippines, thereby the roles and effects of assertions made by Taiwan, are valued for study. The thesis will introduce the Case, the Submissions made by the Philippines, relevant basis and issue on international law in Chapter 2 and 3. Thereinafter, the assertions and claims on U-shaped Line, historic rights, Itu Aba made by Taiwan, the Philippines and the finds made by the Tribunal will be discussed in Chapter 4 and 5. In chapter 6, the thesis will discuss the roles and effects of the assertions made by Taiwan, in accordance with the change of the assertions thereafter made by DPP government and the possible effects. The conclusion will be brought in Chapter 7.

Set-off is meant to be one of the most important defences in arbitration proceedings. About 15 - 20 per cent of all international arbitrations involve set-off defence. There is not much dispute about the possibility to virtually extinguish mutual claims of the parties however national concepts of set-off differ dramatically. Moreover, in contrast to most other legal mechanisms set-off is always formed by no less than two obligations. These obligations may be regarded differently and be subject to different laws which can lead to a series of difficult questions regarding not only choice-of-law but also judicial competence. The centrum of the controversy lays in the situation when the defendant raises his cross-claim, which falls outside the scope of an arbitration agreement, to be mutually offset. Arbitrators can be in a very difficult position as they have to find, in the absence of any clear rule, reasonable limits of the adjudication of set-off. This work aims to find out what should be the limits of the adjudication of set-off with the cross-claim over which the tribunal normally wouldn't be competent to decide. There is offered a legal framework with a set of good practices which should be followed in order to strengthen legal certainty, procedural efficiency and effective functioning of...

碩士
國立臺灣海洋大學
海洋法律研究所
104
People's Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as China) former Chairman Mao Zedong in the early China that is proposed to build a powerful navy, but this idea has not been achieved in his lifetime, and its naval strategy also remain in the "coastal defense" stage . Deng Xiaoping took over the proposed "reform and opening" policy, accelerate gradually increase as China's economic strength and national defense modernization, the Navy also gradually build and update weaponry, and military services strategy from "coastal defense" to " coastal defense, "and even" blue-water navy, "the direction of change. February 1, 2016 China announced that the original seven military are: Beijing Military Region, Shenyang Military Region, Jinan Military Region, Nanjing Military Region, Guangzhou Military Region, Lanzhou Military Region and the Chengdu Military Region; five are newly established theater: theater in eastern and southern theater western theater, theater in northern and central theater. President Xi Jinping said that contemporary China, "the theater bears cope with the strategic direction of the security threats and maintain peace, deter war, the mission of winning the war." It is nearly 50 years since the Chinese military reform China's largest. Chinese army newspaper commentary said that large-scale reform of the PLA will gradually abandon Soviet-style command system to the US model transformation. Since the November 16, 1994 entered into force "of the 1982 United Nations Convention," the legal regime of the exclusive economic zone has been established, the coastal States have declared Exclusive Economic Zone extends to 200 nautical miles. Problems economic zone overlaps have occurred, and thus may be due to competition for fisheries, oil resources have a serious conflict in the overlapping waters of this study was to China and the Philippines to explore for arbitration, the Philippines currently has tribunal in The Hague for arbitration, claims one the diameter of the Nansha Taiping Island reefs rather than move to the island, very huge impact on our country. This paper first Chinese sea power from period to build political evolution of contemporary leaders in power after Xi Jinping described, followed by research in 2002, "Li Jidan Batam Island and tin Sovereignty case" in 2007, "between Nicaragua and Honduras Caribbean territorial and maritime dispute "and 2008" Pedra Branca, middle rocks and South Ledge sovereignty case "the three cases, the judge how effective the rule applicable to the parties view as a system associated with the discussion of the islands dispute, the use of the Criteria of some discussion and further compare the same proposition People's Republic of China and China Nansha Islands, Paracel Islands, Dongsha Islands and Dongsha Islands sovereignty, as the four islands, the effective compliance with rule requirements. Finally, the Philippines arbitration ruling on Chinese extent as the proper research and analysis, put forward their views and suggestions, hoping to better understand the changes in the international situation itself, sovereignty done, inter-island legitimate occupation and other related knowledge can be helpful , also expected in the workplace, it is possible to defend our sea territory, to ensure that our interests are not violated and bullied by his country as powerful as the use of sea between the great powers of the competition tool.

L’outre-mer comprend des régions, des pays et des territoires aux statuts divers et au passé hérité en grande partie des grandes puissances européennes, ce qui les a placés dans une communauté d’intérêts avec les Etats auxquels ils sont rattachés mais aussi avec l’Union européenne (UE).Néanmoins, ces régions, pays et territoires n’ont eu cesse de reconstruire entre eux des liens historiques et culturels et de tisser des relations avec l’ensemble de l’outre-mer afin de présenter une cohérence d’ensemble dans leur négociation avec l’Union européenne.Les régions ultrapériphériques appliquent le droit communautaire tandis que les pays et territoires d’outre-mer, situés en dehors du territoire communautaire, connaissent un régime d’association avec l’Union européenne.Le Danemark, l’Espagne, la France, les Pays-Bas, le Portugal et le Royaume-Uni ont procédé aux réformes constitutionnelles autorisant de multiples évolutions statutaires dans le respect du droit à l’autodétermination des populations.Forts d’une évolution statutaire et d’un développement économique et social continu, les régions, pays et territoires d’outre-mer souhaitent maintenant faire valoir leurs droits et défendre leurs intérêts au niveau européen et sur la scène internationale.La globalisation des politiques les incite à se regrouper au sein d’institutions internationales. Le rattachement de ces territoires à des Etats de droit leur a ouvert la voie à des systèmes juridiques bien structurés mais aussi aux valeurs européennes. Leur ultrapériphérité les a placés dans une situation géopolitique qui les a fait accéder aux relations internationales.L’objet de cette thèse est de démontrer l’interdépendance entre ces différents ordres juridiques et l’influence du droit européen et du droit international sur l’évolution statutaire de l’outre-mer vers davantage d’autonomie, mais aussi de responsabilisation et de prise en charge de son développement au moyen d’une implication dans son environnement régional, d’une coopération inter-régionale ou transnationale et d’une participation aux travaux des organisations internationales
The Overseas regions, countries and territories present various statuses inherited mainly from the major European Powers which placed them in a relationship of a common interest not only with their mother countries but also with the European Union (EU).However, these territories have continuously re-built between them historical and cultural links, and weaved relationship within the entire Overseas to appear as a constituted whole while negotiating with the EU.The outermost regions (OR) apply Community Law while the Overseas Countries and territories (OCT) situated outside the territory of the Community, have Association Arrangements with the EU.Denmark, France, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain and United Kingdom have proceeded to necessary constitutional reforms to allow numerous articles amendments in respect of right to self-determination of peoples.At the light of statutory amendments and of a continuous economic and social development, the Outermost regions (OR) and the Overseas Countries and Territories (OCT), now wish to assert their rights and to defend their interests at European and International level.Globalisation of policies encourages OR and OCT to gather within International bodies. The rule of law of the related countries opens them to well-structured legal systems and to European values. The outermost geopolitical localisation makes them to have access to international relations.The purpose of this thesis is to demonstrate the interdependence between these different legal systems and the impact of European and International Law on the statutory amendments of the Overseas towards more autonomy, but also liabilities and involvement on their own development by using their regional environment, inter-regional and transnational cooperation and taking part at the works of international organisations