Bibliographic record
Abstract
The problems faced by an arbitrator in determining which law to apply to the substance of the dispute before him are considerable. His problems are alleviated when he finds a contractual clause specifying an express choice of law; he therefore gives effect to the parties choice of Taw. However, when parties fail to indicate in their contract a law to govern their disputes, an arbitrator, unlike a judge does not have national rules to guide him in determining this law. The problems faced by an arbitrator has been subject to extensive debates and many authors have advocated solutions to these problems which daily face the arbitrators. These discussions have centered around the issue whether an arbitrator should apply conflict of law rules, non-national rules or base his decision on an autonomous legal order, commonly referred to as the New Lex Mercatoria. The proponents of the latter view argue that arbitrators should not take into consideration any conflict of law rules or base their decisions on a national legal order. This concept of New Lex Mercatoria, appears to be gaining considerable support amongst arbitrators. It is argued by the supporters of this view that the principle of party autonomy, which is universally recognized by all trading nations, allows arbitrators to base their decisions on this non-national legal order. This thesis too is also directed to the study of the above mentioned issues. An analysis of the above mentioned views show that the New Lex Mercatoria is still vague and uncertain. It will be argued that it is premature to advocate an autonomous legal order which is yet to be recognized by national legal systems. It is shown that party autonomy is greatly affected by protective legislation of the state and by issues of public policy. Therefore this thesis concludes that an arbitrator ought to refer to conflict of law rules in order to ensure enforceability of the arbitration award. While the present state of affairs is hardly conducive to international trade, an autonomous legal order requires the joint efforts of not only the business world but of national legal systems acting as international legislators.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".