A lei aplicável ao processo de arbitragem internacional

This paper is the author’s Master’s Thesis. It aims to study the content of lexarbitri, i.e. the relevant law regarding international arbitration. Under both Portuguese law and UNCITRAL model law, the seat’s legal provisions shall be applied at all times. Contrarily, French and Swiss legislations allow parties and arbitrators to apply any arbitration law to international arbitration, whether the seat law or a foreign arbitration law. There is not a sole understanding towards the criteria to determine the legal provisions that shall govern international arbitration. Traditionally, the lexarbitri would correspond to the arbitration law of the seat of the arbitration. The territorialistcriteria remains in force under the majority of arbitration laws that the author has consulted.However, it has been criticized by several authorities in international arbitration, who suggest that the arbitration shall be governed by the law of the seat or of the place in which the award is to be enforcement, whichever better grants its enforcement – the cumulative doctrine; or the arbitration shall be governed by a set of provisions that make up the autonomous transnational legal, regardless of the legal provisions of the law of the seat – the transnational doctrine. The author intends to debate the three mentioned understandings regarding the lexarbitriand further explains why the territorialist criteria is the most adequate to the characteristics and demands of international arbitration, to the governing instruments in force and to the need for a useful award.

A intervenção da seguradora nas acções propostas contra o segurado

The problem to be discussed results from the relationship established between the insurer and insured by the conclusion of an insurance contract, namely an optional liability insurance contract, to cover the risks taken by the insured resulting from the occurrence of a claim, such as those arising from the emergence of the liability and consequent obligation to compensate damages caused to a third party. This thesis concerns thus the debate between those who consider that, in the optional insurance, the third party may require compliance with the provision to both the insured and the insurer (in the case of voluntary joinder, pursuant to Art. 27 CCP, which corresponds Art. 32 of the New Code of Civil Procedure, Law n. 41/2013 of 26 June, which entered into force on 1 September, hereinafter New Code) - insurance contract on behalf of a third party conception - in the same way that the insured defendant can bring the insurer to intervene as co-defendant in the main process, pursuant al. a) of art. 325 of the CCP (corresponding to art. 316 of the New Code - main intervention caused), and those who argue that the insurer may only intervene in the action as an ancillary party, to assist the defendant, lacking interest, therefore, in necessary or volunteer joinder, with the consequence that the insurer cannot be sued as a main party - only ancillary intervention is justifiable (cf. art. 330 CPC, which corresponds to art. 321 of the New Code).