Proper regulation of the recognition of choice of court agreements can provide significant advantages for the parties in international business transactions. Effective rules governing the recognition of choice of court agreements allow the parties to litigate before the court of their choice and may oblige a non-chosen court to decline jurisdiction in favour of the chosen court. Therefore, the recognition of choice of court agreements by national courts promotes legal certainty and predictability for the parties, avoids parallel litigation and inconsistent judgments and reduces litigation costs.Choice of court agreements are a fundamental concept in private international law that seeks to ensure that the parties' expectations are met and that their intentions are fulfilled. In 2005, the approach to dealing with choice of court agreements, both at the litigation stage and at the recognition of foreign judgments stage in a commercial context, was harmonised by the global Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements, which entered into force on 1 October 2015 and is currently applicable in 31 countries. It seeks to ensure legal certainty and predictability between parties in international business transactions.Even though the recognition of choice of court agreements is an important consideration in international business transactions, it will be demonstrated that the rules governing the recognition of choice of court agreements in the Gulf Cooperation Council States, which consist of Kuwait, The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Oman, The Kingdom of Bahrain and Qatar, are limited and problematic for the contracting parties and might not be conducive to facilitating and encouraging international business transactions.Therefore, the underlying research question of this study considers the extent to which the current legal regimes for recognition of choice of court agreements in the GCC States is conducive to facilitating and encouraging international business in those States, by enabling the parties to avoid the risks of uncertainty and unpredictability, parallel litigation and inconsistent judgments in their international business transactions, and how the legal situation can be improved by ratifying the 2005 Hague Convention and by modernising their rules as they apply to choice of court agreements.
|Date of Award||1 Jan 2017|
- University Of Strathclyde
|Supervisor||Barry Rodger (Supervisor) & Stephanie Switzer (Supervisor)|