1,720,958 research outputs found
INTERACTION BETWEEN THE SETTING ASIDE OF AN AWARD AND LEAVE FOR ENFORCEMENT
Karaha Bodas case is a notorious case which demonstrates how is unpredictable of the Indonesian court’s practice when facing cases related to arbitration. This case shows various aberrations of the principles that have been commonly accepted in international commercial arbitration but distorted in practice, especially in Indonesia, therefore many experts in the field of international commercial arbitration always mention this case as a “pathology” in international commercial arbitration.[1] This article will examine the interaction between the attempt to set aside of the award, while on the other hand the successful party requests for enforcement in other jurisdictions. The discussion will be focused on the standings of the U.S. courts toward the annulment proceeding in and the judgement of the District Court of Central Jakarta. The findings in this article show that the U.S. courts – like any other jurisdictions – disobeyed the judgement of the annulment which was rendered by Indonesian court, because Indonesian courts were the secondary jurisdiction. In addition, the courts in which the enforcement sought may have discretion whether they will or will not enforce an award which has been vacated in the country of origin. The discretion is guaranteed under the New York Convention 1958
INTERACTION BETWEEN THE SETTING ASIDE OF AN AWARD AND LEAVE FOR ENFORCEMENT* An Overview on Karaha Bodas Case Tension between U.S. Court and Indonesian Court
Karaha Bodas case is a notorious case which demonstrates how is unpredictable of the Indonesian court’s practice when facing cases related to arbitration. This case shows various aberrations of the principles that have been commonly accepted in international commercial arbitration but distorted in practice, especially in Indonesia, therefore many experts in the field of international commercial arbitration always mention this case as a “pathology” in international commercial arbitration.[1] This article will examine the interaction between the attempt to set aside of the award, while on the other hand the successful party requests for enforcement in other jurisdictions. The discussion will be focused on the standings of the U.S. courts toward the annulment proceeding in and the judgement of the District Court of Central Jakarta. The findings in this article show that the U.S. courts – like any other jurisdictions – disobeyed the judgement of the annulment which was rendered by Indonesian court, because Indonesian courts were the secondary jurisdiction. In addition, the courts in which the enforcement sought may have discretion whether they will or will not enforce an award which has been vacated in the country of origin. The discretion is guaranteed under the New York Convention 1958.</jats:p
ACTOR SEQUITUR FORUM REI: A THEORITICAL STUDY
The actor sequitur forum rei principle is the primary basis for determining the relative competence of civil courts in countries that adopt civil law systems. In this article, the role of the actor sequitur forum rei will be examined theoretically by analyzing theories related to personal jurisdiction, categorization of jurisdiction, and procedural justice theory. The analysis results indicate that actor sequitur forum rei is founded on the theory of power and is classified as a "connected" jurisdiction with a general nature, as jurisdiction is linked to the defendant's domicile. It enables the defendant to be sued in the forum of their domicile at any time and for any reason. Additionally, according to procedural justice theory, actor sequitur forum rei is shown to provide the defendant with protective aspects
BINDING EFFECT OF ARBITRATION CLAUSE TO THIRD PARTIES: PRIVITY OF CONTRACT DOCTRINE Vs. PIERCING THE CORPORATE VEIL
The arbitration agreement is the legal basis for the arbitration forum to examine and adjudicate the dispute which arose from a private relationship where the parties agree to settle the dispute in arbitration forum. As an agreement, the arbitration agreement still applies the principles of contract, including the principle of privity of contract. In the doctrine of privity of contract, an agreement is only binding and have legal effect only to the parties, the agreement in principle, cannot provide profit or loss to a third party. In the arbitration agreement, only the parties are bound by the arbitration agreement that can become parties to the case investigation. However, in the development of arbitration practice also shows that a third party, not a signatory to the arbitration agreement can be held accountable through an examination of the arbitration case. Such a situation is possible if the third party is resident as a holding company or shareholder of a limited liability company, in which the limited liability company is bound by an arbitration agreement, and the holding company or shareholder proven to perform actions through a subsidiary or a limited liability resulting harm the other party
Regulating Court Jurisdiction to Protect Weaker Parties: An Overview of the Indonesian Civil Justice System
It is necessary to facilitate easy access to courts to protect weaker parties. This can be achieved by regulating the personal jurisdiction of the court so that weaker parties can easily access it. In the Indonesian civil justice system, some regulations have been implemented to protect weaker parties through the jurisdiction of courts. This article elaborates on these regulations and their obstacles in protecting the access of consumers, workers, women and children, and foreigners to Indonesian courts. A statutory approach with reference to the general principles of the court’s personal jurisdiction and the principles of access to justice for weaker parties This article finds that some regulations related to the court’s personal jurisdiction in Indonesia provide protection to weaker parties by allowing them to submit their claim to the court where they reside against the counterparty. However, a lack of consistency may hinder its implementation
Regulating Court Jurisdiction to Protect Weaker Parties: An Overview of the Indonesian Civil Justice System
It is necessary to facilitate easy access to courts to protect weaker parties. This can be achieved by regulating the personal jurisdiction of the court so that weaker parties can easily access it. In the Indonesian civil justice system, some regulations have been implemented to protect weaker parties through the jurisdiction of courts. This article elaborates on these regulations and their obstacles in protecting the access of consumers, workers, women and children, and foreigners to Indonesian courts. A statutory approach with reference to the general principles of the court’s personal jurisdiction and the principles of access to justice for weaker parties This article finds that some regulations related to the court’s personal jurisdiction in Indonesia provide protection to weaker parties by allowing them to submit their claim to the court where they reside against the counterparty. However, a lack of consistency may hinder its implementation
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
We provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
- …
