English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Resumen: Las controversias de caracter jurisdiccional son muy comunes en litigios derivados de la contratacion maritima internacional y, en este contexto, la eleccion del foro es una cuestion capital. Tanto las clausulas atributivas de jurisdiccion y como las clausulas de arbitraje son dos mecanismos diferentes que ayudan a garantizar la imparcialidad y la previsibilidad en la resolucion de las controver­sias internacionales. A pesar de sus beneficios, en el contexto de los documentos de transporte maritimo internacional estas clausulas pueden ser inconvenientes para las partes que se ven obligadas a litigar ante foros lejanos. La mayoria de los conocimientos de embarque contienen atributivas de jurisdiccion que establecen que las partes deben acudir a determinado tribunal para resolver cualquier controversia que surja en relacion con el contrato de transporte internacional. Sin embargo, cuando se emite un co-nocimiento de embarque bajo una clausula de fletamento que incorpore expresamente la clausula de arbitraje, las partes en el contrato de transporte incluidas en el conocimiento de embarque, pueden verse obligados a acudir al arbitraje. El art. 468 Ley de Navegacion Maritima regula la validez formal de aquellas clausulas de jurisdiccion y arbitraje que prevean la sumision de las partes a una jurisdiccion extranjera o a un arbitraje en el extranjero e impone la negociacion individual y separada de ambas clausulas como requisito de validez. Palabras clave: Derecho internacional privado, clausulas atributivas de jurisdiccion, clausulas de arbitraje, arbitraje maritimo, Ley de Navegacion maritima de 2014. Abstract: Disputes about jurisdiction are very common in litigation arising from international maritime contracting. In this context the choice of forum is an important matter. Jurisdiction and ar­bitration clauses are two different mechanisms that help to ensure impartiality and predictability in international dispute resolution. Despite their benefits, in the context of international maritime transport documents these clauses can be inconvenient for parties that are forced to litigate many times before distant fora. Most bills of lading contain jurisdiction clauses providing that parties are to resolve any disputes arising in connection with the contract of carriage contained in the bill through litigation in the courts. Where a bill of lading is issued under a charter party, however, and where it expressly incor­porates the charter party’s arbitration clause into its terms, the parties to the contract of carriage con­tained in the bill of lading, including any transferees of the bill, may be obliged to refer their disputes to arbitration. Article 468 of the new Maritime Navigation Act regulates the formal validity of choice of court agreements and arbitration agreements establishing the submission to a foreign court or to an arbitration located abroad. Keywords: International Private Law, jurisdiction and arbitration clauses, maritime arbitration, Spa­nish Maritime Navigation Act 2014

cuadernos de derecho transnacional

Alternativas e incertidumbres de las cláusulas de solución de controversias en la contratación marítima internacional = Alternatives and uncertainties of the dispute settlement clauses in international maritime contracts