埃及混合法庭和国际仲裁

P. Leboulanger
{"title":"埃及混合法庭和国际仲裁","authors":"P. Leboulanger","doi":"10.54648/bcdr2016003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Historically, Mixed Courts of Egypt, and recently international arbitration, have led to controversial debates as to their role in the Egyptian legal system. The Mixed Courts have been and are often still considered an infringement of Egyptian sovereignty because they were established during colonialism. However, the courts came into existence because Egypt needed a new, efficient legal system to end the consular courts, which were created under the Capitulations Treaties in the Ottoman Empire and caused unequal and sometimes biased treatment of Egyptian nationals. But beyond the geopolitical and historical context, the Mixed Courts have contributed to the development of the modern Egyptian legal system and Egyptian heritage in comparative law and international private law. Although the Mixed Courts and international arbitration proceedings are similar (e.g., different nationalities and legal backgrounds of judges and arbitrators, the possibility to apply different laws to the parties’ disputes), the historical and political context that resulted in the creation of the mechanisms is different. Thus, the claim that international arbitration would overstep Egyptian sovereignty is unfounded. On the contrary, Egypt’s desire to have a modern set of arbitration rules is shared with other States seeking participation in the economic globalization, and international arbitration has proved to be an appropriate mechanism for international trade dispute resolution.","PeriodicalId":166341,"journal":{"name":"BCDR International Arbitration Review","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mixed Courts of Egypt and International Arbitration\",\"authors\":\"P. Leboulanger\",\"doi\":\"10.54648/bcdr2016003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Historically, Mixed Courts of Egypt, and recently international arbitration, have led to controversial debates as to their role in the Egyptian legal system. The Mixed Courts have been and are often still considered an infringement of Egyptian sovereignty because they were established during colonialism. However, the courts came into existence because Egypt needed a new, efficient legal system to end the consular courts, which were created under the Capitulations Treaties in the Ottoman Empire and caused unequal and sometimes biased treatment of Egyptian nationals. But beyond the geopolitical and historical context, the Mixed Courts have contributed to the development of the modern Egyptian legal system and Egyptian heritage in comparative law and international private law. Although the Mixed Courts and international arbitration proceedings are similar (e.g., different nationalities and legal backgrounds of judges and arbitrators, the possibility to apply different laws to the parties’ disputes), the historical and political context that resulted in the creation of the mechanisms is different. Thus, the claim that international arbitration would overstep Egyptian sovereignty is unfounded. On the contrary, Egypt’s desire to have a modern set of arbitration rules is shared with other States seeking participation in the economic globalization, and international arbitration has proved to be an appropriate mechanism for international trade dispute resolution.\",\"PeriodicalId\":166341,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BCDR International Arbitration Review\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BCDR International Arbitration Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54648/bcdr2016003\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BCDR International Arbitration Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/bcdr2016003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

从历史上看,埃及的混合法院,以及最近的国际仲裁,导致了关于它们在埃及法律体系中的作用的有争议的辩论。混合法庭是在殖民主义时期建立的,因此一直被认为是对埃及主权的侵犯。然而,法院的存在是因为埃及需要一个新的,有效的法律体系来结束领事法院,领事法院是根据奥斯曼帝国的投降条约建立的,导致对埃及国民的不平等,有时甚至是有偏见的待遇。但在地缘政治和历史背景之外,混合法院对现代埃及法律制度的发展以及埃及在比较法和国际私法方面的遗产做出了贡献。虽然混合法院和国际仲裁程序是类似的(例如,法官和仲裁员的国籍和法律背景不同,对当事方的争端适用不同法律的可能性),但导致建立这些机制的历史和政治背景是不同的。因此,国际仲裁将超越埃及主权的说法是没有根据的。相反,埃及希望有一套现代化的仲裁规则,这与其他寻求参与经济全球化的国家是一致的,国际仲裁已被证明是解决国际贸易争端的适当机制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Mixed Courts of Egypt and International Arbitration
Historically, Mixed Courts of Egypt, and recently international arbitration, have led to controversial debates as to their role in the Egyptian legal system. The Mixed Courts have been and are often still considered an infringement of Egyptian sovereignty because they were established during colonialism. However, the courts came into existence because Egypt needed a new, efficient legal system to end the consular courts, which were created under the Capitulations Treaties in the Ottoman Empire and caused unequal and sometimes biased treatment of Egyptian nationals. But beyond the geopolitical and historical context, the Mixed Courts have contributed to the development of the modern Egyptian legal system and Egyptian heritage in comparative law and international private law. Although the Mixed Courts and international arbitration proceedings are similar (e.g., different nationalities and legal backgrounds of judges and arbitrators, the possibility to apply different laws to the parties’ disputes), the historical and political context that resulted in the creation of the mechanisms is different. Thus, the claim that international arbitration would overstep Egyptian sovereignty is unfounded. On the contrary, Egypt’s desire to have a modern set of arbitration rules is shared with other States seeking participation in the economic globalization, and international arbitration has proved to be an appropriate mechanism for international trade dispute resolution.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Changed Circumstances and Oil and Gas Contracts Aramco: The Story of the World’s Most Valuable Oil Concession and Its Landmark Arbitration Petroleum Concessions in Egypt: A Recipe for Disputes? Stabilization Clauses: Do They Have a Future? COVID-19 and the Exceptions to Contractual Liability in Arab Contract Law
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1