چالش‌های بازیگران داوری در پرتوی الزامات نظام‌های تحریمی

کدخدایی, عباسعلی; ریخته گر برنجی, ریحانه

doi:10.22066/cilamag.2021.110409.1734

چالش‌های بازیگران داوری در پرتوی الزامات نظام‌های تحریمی

نوع مقاله : علمی پژوهشی

نویسندگان

¹ استاد دانشکدهٔ حقوق و علوم سیاسی دانشگاه تهران

² دانشجوی دکتری حقوق بین‌الملل دانشکدة حقوق‌وعلوم‌سیاسی دانشگاه تهران

10.22066/cilamag.2021.110409.1734

چکیده

داوری تجاری بین المللی، نقطة اتکا و ضمانت اجرای معاملات تجاری بین المللی محسوب و کارآمدی آن، موجب آسودگی خاطر شرکای تجاری و سرمایه گذاران میشود. اما بروز چالش‌های ناشی از تحریم و پیامدهای نقض آنها سبب شده بازیگران داوری اعم از طرفین اختلاف، داوران و مؤسسات داوری با این مسئله درگیر شوند. مدیریت این موقعیتها تنها با توجه به جزئیات و عبارات هر رژیم تحریمی ممکن است.
دستیابی به رهیافتی واقع بینانه و منطقی که ما را به شناخت آثار تحریم بر داوری رهنمون شود، یکی از نیازهای اساسی نظام بین الملل و بخصوص نظام حقوقی حاکم بر آن است. پس با توجه به ضرورت این امر به‌ ویژه برای ایران، پرسش بنیادین پژوهش این است که دربارة چالشهای حقوقی ناشی از تحریم که بازیگران داوری با آن مواجه اند، چه راهکاری میتوان اندیشید تا حقوق طرفهای درگیر به‌خوبی استیفا شود؟

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

The Challenges of Actors in Arbitration in Light of the Requirements of Sanctions Regimes

نویسندگان [English]

AbbasAli Kadkhodai ¹
Reihane Rikhtegar Berenji ²

¹ Professor of Law at University of Tehran, Faculty of Law

² PhD student at University of Tehran, Faculty of Law

چکیده [English]

International commercial arbitration is considered as the fulcrum and enforcing tool of international commercial transactions. The efficiency of this mechanism brings relief for business partners and foreign investors. Unfortunately, the challenges of sanctions and the concerns about the consequences of their breach have affected the active arbitral actors such as the parties to the dispute, arbitrators and arbitral institutions. Managing these situations is only conceivable by marking the details and phrases of each sanctions regime.
Reaching a realistic and logical solution which would guide us to learn the impacts of sanctions on arbitration is one of the vital needs of the international system, especially the governing legal system. Considering the necessity of this issue –especially for Iran- the main question here is the approach to be used to manage these legal challenges that the arbitral actors face every day, so that the rights of everyone involved can be preserved. This research, using the descriptive-analytic method, strives to clarify the legal challenges of sanctions for international commercial arbitration through doctrine and jurisprudence.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

Arbitration
Sanction
Responsibility
Arbitral Institutions
International Commerce

مراجع

الف. فارسی

ـ کتاب
- سادات میدانی، سیدحسین و مهدی خلیلی؛ بایستههای حقوقی نظام تحریم ایالات ‌متحده؛ تحریمهای ایران، شهر دانش، 1397.
- نفیو، ریچارد؛ هنر تحریمها، نگاهی از درون میدان، معاونت پژوهش اقتصادی، مرکز پژوهشهای مجلس شورای اسلامی، 1397.
- وکیل، امیرساعد و زهرا تحصیلی؛ ایران و تحریمهای بینالمللی، مجد، 1392.
ـ مقاله
- خدری، صالح؛ «دادرسی منصفانه در داوری تجاری بینالمللی»، مطالعات حقوق تطبیقی، دورة 6، شمارة 2، پاییز و زمستان 1394.
- ممتاز، جمشید و سیروس متوسل؛ «حق بر دادرسی در کنوانسیون اروپایی حقوق بشر»،فصلنامة مطالعات حقوق عمومی، دورة 46، شمارة 4، زمستان 1395.
- رضوانیان، اویس؛ «مسئولیت حقوقی سازمانهای داوری ناشی از استنکاف از رسیدگی به اختلافات ارجاعی»، فصلنامة پژوهش حقوق خصوصی، سال هفتم، شمارة 24، پاییز 1397.
- رهبر، نوید؛ «دریافت غرامت به استناد تحریم غیرقانونی اشخاص توسط اتحادیة اروپا»، مجلة حقوقی بینالمللی، شمارة 60، بهار و تابستان 1398.
- قلیپور و دیگران؛ «بررسی اصل تعادل ترافعی (تناظر) در دادرسی قضایی و داوری تجاری بینالمللی»، فصلنامة پژوهشهای فقه و حقوق اسلامی، سال 10، شمارة 37، پاییز 1393.
ب. انگلیسی

- Books
- De Brabandere, Eric & Holloway, David, Sanctions and International Arbitration, Research Handbook on Sanctions and International Law, Grotius Centre & Leiden University, 2016.
- Habegger, Philipp & Others, Arbitral Institutions under Scrutiny, No. 40, ASA special series, Huntington New York USA: Juris, 2013.
- Silveira, Mercédeh Azeredo da., Trade Sanctions and International Sales: An Inquiry into International Arbitration and Commercial Litigation, Alphen aan den Rijn: Wolters Kluwer, 2014.
- Von Hoffmann, Internationally Mandatory Rules of Law before Arbitral Tribunals, Acts of State and Arbitration, (Böckstiegel, K.-H., ed.), Carl Heymanns Verlag KG, Köln/Berlin/Bonn/München, German Institution of Arbitration, 1997.
- Axelrod, Robert M., The Evolution of Cooperation, Basic Books, United States, 1984.
- Articles
- Beechey, John, van Haersolte-van Hof, Jacomijn& Magnusson,Annette, “The Potential Impact of the EU Sanctions against Russia on International Arbitration Administered by EU-Based Institutions”, 17 June 2015. available at: http://sccinstitute.com/media/80988/legal-insight-icc_lcia_scc-on-sanctions_ 17-june-2015.pdf.
- Brasington, Hazel & McDougall, Katie, “Sanctions, Arbitration and the Energy Industry”, Norton Rose Fulbright, International Arbitration Report, October 2018, Issue 11.
- Cummins, Tom & Others, “Economic Sanctions: Implications for International Arbitration”, Global Arbitration Review, 19 April 2017. available at: https://globalarbitrationreview.com/insight/the-middle-eastern-and-african-arbitration-review-2017/1139759/economic-sanctions-implications-for-international-arbitration.
- Dent, Marian, “Notes on Economic Sanctions Basics”, The EU-US Sanctions Regimes: Practical Implications for Dispute Resolution Lawyers and Their Clients. available at: https://shop.americanbar.org/PersonifyImages/ ProductFiles/187204082/EUUS%20Sanctions%20Regimes.pdf.
- Hunt, Christopher, “The Challenge of Sanctions for Arbitral Participants”, 5 October 2015. available at: http://kluwerarbitrationblog.com/2015/10/05/ the-challenge-of-sanctions-for-arbitral-participants.
- Jones, Tom, “A Spotlight on Sanctions”, Global Arbitration Review, 2 October 2018.
- Kenton, Maurice, Sanctions – a Reminder of the Impact on Arbitration, Clyde & Co., 17 May 2018. available at: https://www.clydeco.com/ insight/article/sanctions-a-reminder-of-the-impact-on-arbitration.
- Mutaye, Irina & Billerbo, Elena, “Choices of Arbitration Venue in light of Sanctions against Russia”, 2015. available at: https://sccinstitute.com/ media/76670/choice-of-arbitration-venue-in-light-of-the-sanctions-against- russia.pdf.
- Russian Arbitration Association, “Russian Arbitration Association Survey: the Impact of Sanctions on Commercial Arbitration”, 2016. available at: https://shop.americanbar.org/PersonifyImages/ProductFiles/ 297648970/Roundtable%206.pdf.
- Shah, Chiraag & Mahajan, Kartikey, “Implications of economic Sanctions on International Arbitration”, Arbitration Blog, Thomson Reuters, 5 July 2018. available at: http://arbitrationblog.practicallaw.com/implications-of-economic-sanctions-on-international-arbitration.
- Shaleva, Vesselina, “The ‘Public Policy’ Exception to the Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards in the Theory and Jurisprudence of the Central and East European States and Russia”, Arbitration International, vol. 19, Issue. 1, March 2003, pp. 67–93.
- Szabados, Tamás, “EU Economic Sanctions in Arbitration”, Journal of International Arbitration, vol. 35, Issue 4, 2018.
- Van Hecke, George, “The Effect of Economic Coercion on Private Relationships”, Revue Belge de droit international, R.B.D.I. 1984/1985-1.
- Veit, Marc & Schneider, Tino, “Implications of Sanctions on Energy-Related Arbitration”, 12 February 2016, International Law Office Newsletter. available at: https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g =2f5e4a32-7421-44c8-b9e4-3f98e9d729c3.
- Instruments
- European Council, Regulation No. 2015/1755 (concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Burundi), OJ L257/1–10, 1 October 2015.
- European Council, Regulation No. 269/2014, 17 March 2014 (concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine), OJ L78/6–15.
- European Council, Regulation No. 833/2014 (concerning restrictive measures in view of Russia's actions destabilizing the situation in Ukraine), 31 July 2014, OJ L229/1 (amended by Council Regulation (EU) No. 960/2014).
- OFAC, ‘Guidance on the Release of Limited Amounts of Blocked Funds for Payment of Legal Fees and Costs Incurred in Challenging the Blocking of US Persons in Administrative or Civil Proceedings. available at: http://www.treasury.gov/resourcecenter/sanctions/Documents/legal_fee_guide.pdf
- Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of Its Fifty-third Session, Yearbook of the UN International Law Commission, vol.2, 2001.
- Security Council, S/RES/1718, 14 October 2006.
- Security Council, S/RES/1970, 26 February 2011.
- Security Council, S/RES/2231, 20 July 2015.
- Security Council, S/RES/687, 3 April 1991
- Security Council, S/RES/757, 30 May 1992.
- Security Council, S/RES/917, 6 May 1994.
- The Council of the European Union, “Guidelines on implementation and evaluation of restrictive measures (sanctions) in the framework of the EU Common Foreign and Security Policy”, 15 June 2012.
- US Department of the Treasury, “Treasury and Commerce Announce Further Amendments to the Cuba Sanctions Regulations”, 18 September 2015.
- US Executive Order No 13660, “Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Situation in Ukraine”, 6 March 2014, 79 Fed Reg 46.
- Cases
- American Arbitration Association (“AAA”), Northrop Corp. v. Triad Int'l Marketing SA, 593 F. Supp. 928 (CD Cal. 1984), rev'd, 811 F.2d 1265 (9th Cir. 1987).
- Cour d’appel du Québec, La Compagnie Nationale Air France v Libyan Arab Airlines, 31 March 2003.
- Cour d’Appel de Paris, SNF v. Chambre de Commerce Internationale, 15 September 1998.
- Cour d’Appel de Paris, Societe Cubic Defence System v. Chambre de Commerce, 15 September 1998.
- Cour de Cassasion in France (First Civil Chamber), Societe Cubic Defence System v. Chambre de Commerce, 20 February 2001.
- Court of Arbitration attached to the Chamber of Foreign Trade of the German Democratic Republic, Berlin, GDR party v. FRG party, Case n. 103/74, 28 January 1976, YCA 1979.
- ICC, Award n. 6773, 1992, ICC Bull. 1995/1.
- Royal Courts of Justice (Queen’s Bench Division), MODSAF v. IMS, [2019] EWHC 1994 (Comm), 2019/07/24.
- The European Court of Justice (Fifth Chamber), Užsienio reikalų ministerija and Finansinių nusikaltimų tyrimo tarnyba v. Vladimir Peftiev et al., Case C-314/13, ECLI:EU: C:2014:1645, 12 June 2014.
- Tribunal de grande instance de Paris, Ceskilovenska Obchodni BankaA.S. (Cekobanka) v. Chambre de commerce internationale, 8 October 1986.
- Tribunal de grande instance de Paris, République de Guinée v. Chambre arbitrale de Paris, 28 January 1987.
- Websites
- Department of Commerce, Bureau of Industry & Security, Office of Exporter Services & Department of Treasury Office of Foreign Assets Controls, “BIS & OFAC: Embargoes & Other Sanctions”. available at: https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/documents/compliance-training/export-administration-regulations-training/381-embargoes-pdf.
- HM Treasury, “Financial Sanctions: Frequently Asked Questions”, (August 2013). available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/ uploads/attachment-data/file/302397/August-2013-version-amended.pdf.
- OFAC License Application Page. available at: https://www.treasury.gov/ resource-center/sanctions/Pages/licensing.aspx.
- Switzerland Global sanctions guide. available at: https://sanctionsguide. eversheds-sutherland.com/countries/switzerland.
- US Department of the Treasury Website. available at: https://www.treasury.gov/ resource-center/faqs/Sanctions/Pages/faq_general.aspx.
- US Department of the Treasury, Specially Designated Nationals And Blocked Persons List (SDN) Human Readable Lists. available at: http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/SDN-List/Pages/default.aspx.