CURRENT TRENDS IN DEVELOPMENT OF INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION IN LATIN AMERICA: LEGAL ASPECTS

INTRODUCTION. The article deals with the development of modern legislation on international commercial arbitration in Latin America. The role of OAS 1975 Panama convention as the starting point of development of the modern international commercial arbitration in the region has been exposed. Relationships between the Convention and the UN 1958 New York convention have been outlined. The latest changes in the Latin-American legislator’s approach to international commercial arbitration, constitutional aspect included, have been briefly summarized based upon current legislations of 11 countries of the region.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. The materials for the article were the works of Latin American, European, American and Russian researchers in the field of international commercial arbitration, as well as the existing arbitration laws of Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Paraguay, Peru, Mexico and Uruguay. The methodological basis of the research consists of general scientific and special methods: dialectical method, methods of analysis and synthesis, deduction and induction, comparative legal and historical legal methods.

RESEARCH RESULTS. In the article the author shows the existence of two legislative approaches to the legal regulation of the ICA in Latin America. The first “traditional” approach is focused on the development, first of all, of domestic, national arbitration. It is followed by the legislator of the Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay. The second approach is “modern”. It is based on the principles of the UNCITRAL Model Law and provides for the equal application of the general international principles formulated in the Model Law to both national and international arbitration. It is followed by the legislator of Bolivia, Venezuela, Colombia, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru, Chile and Ecuador.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. In this article the author draws attention to the overcoming by the countries of the region of the negative consequences of the Calvo doctrine in the field of international commercial arbitration through constitutional reform (Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Ecuador, Paraguay, Peru, Chile and Venezuela) or the practice of the highest judicial authorities (Brazil, Mexico and Uruguay). In addition, the author considers the new laws on arbitration that have been adopted in these countries (other than Argentina and Uruguay), more or less based on the text of the UNCITRAL Model Law. The author concludes that despite the impressive efforts both at the constitutional and legislative levels the process of creating a favorable legal environment for international commercial arbitration of a modern type in these countries in particular and in Latin America in general has not yet been completed.

1. Berizonce O.R. El arbitraje institucional en Iberoamérica. – Derecho PUCP. 2000. No 53. P. 759–760.

2. Bermudez Abreu Y., Esis Villaroel I. La Ley Modelo de Arbitraje Comercial Internacional de la CNUDMI y su impacto en el ordenamiento jurídico venezolano. – Revista de Derecho. 2008. Vol. 29. P. 237–266.

3. Briceño Berrú J.E. Teoría y praxis del arbitraje comercial internacional en América Latina. – Agenda Internacional. 2011. No 29. P. 299–346.

4. Coelho E., Chierighini M. Principais aspectos da arbitragem comercial internacional sob a otica brasileira. – RIDB. 2013. No 7. P. 6659–6759.

5. Conejero Roos C., Grion R.S. Arbitration in Brazil: Law and Practice from an ICC Perspective. – Vol. 17 ICC International Court of Arbitration Bulletin. 2006. P. 11–13.

6. Corrie C.A. International Commercial Arbitration in Brazil. – Comparative Law Yearbook of International Business. Wolters Kluwer Law & Business. 2013.Vol. 35. P. 113–158.

7. de Oliveira J.A. A arbitragem e o poder judicial. – Revista da EJUSE. 2013.No 18. P. 15–21.

8. Doronina N.G. Pravovaya model’ ekonomicheskoi integratsii v stranakh Latinskoi Ameriki: monografiya [The legal model of Latin American economic integration. Monograph] Moscow: Infra-M Publ. 2017. 168 p. (In Russ.)

9. Ermakova E.P. Etapy razvitiya mezhdunarodnogo kommercheskogo arbitrazha v stranakh Latinskoi Ameriki [Stages of development of international commercial arbitration in the Latin-American countries]. – Probely v rossiiskom zakonodatel’stve. 2011. No 5. P. 55–58. (In Russ.)

10. Ermakova E.P. Mezhdunarodnyi kommercheskii arbitrazh v Venesuele [International commercial arbitration in Venezuela]. – Pravovaya Initsiativa. 2014. No 1. 8 p. URL: http://49e.ru/ru/2014/1/9 (accessed date: 18.08.2017) (In Russ.)

11. Ermakova E.P. Reforma arbitrazhnogo zakonodatel’stva Meksiki 2011 goda [The 2011 reform of arbitration legislation in Mexico]. – Probely v rossiiskom zakonodatel’stve. 2012. No 3. P. 153–156. (In Russ.)

12. Fernandez Rozas, J.. C. La Constitución mexicana y el arbitraje commercial. – Cuestiones Constitucionales. 2017. No 16. P. 159–204.

13. Finizio S., Narancio V. Beyond Brazil. – Commercial Dispute Resolution. 2013. November-December. P. 65– 69.

14. Hamilton J.H. Three Decades of Latin American Commercial Arbitration. – University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law. 2009. Vol. 30. Issue 4. P. 1099–1119.

15. León Robayo E.I. Perspectiva y arbitrabilidad de la Convención Interamericana de Arbitraje Comercial Internacional. Opinión Jurídica, Universidad de Medellin. 2012. Vol. 11. No P. 131–144.

16. Becerra R.R. The constitutional review of international commercial arbitral awards in Latin America and the challenges for legal certainty. Insights from Colombian jurisdiction. – Revista Tribuna Internacional. 2014. Vol. 3. No 6. 11–34.

17. Rivera J., Parodi G. Contrato de arbitraje. Posibilidad de incorporarlo al Codigo Civil. Buenos Aires: La Ley. 2012. 838 p.

18. Rocha Gabriel V.D., Fontoura Costa J.A. O Mercosul e as controversias sobre investimentos. – Revista de la Secretaría del Tribunal Permanente de Revisión. 2015. Año 3. No 5. P. 267–284. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.16890/ rstpr.a3.n5.267

19. Santos Belandro R. B. Derecho Comercial Internacional. Montevideo: la Asociación de Escribanos de Uruguay. 2008. 589 p.

20. Van den Berg A.J. The New York Convention 1958 and Panama Convention 1975: Redundancy or Compatibility? – Arbitration Interntional. 1989. Vol. 5. P. 214–229.