The dispute settlement procedure shall recognize the European Convention of Human Rights and the obliged rights that come within it. Such rights concerning this subject area of law are the right to a fair trial, equal treatment and non-discrimination. Such a dispute settlement system shall be transparent, predictable and efficient, which means, that it shall be a system free from corruption. Langston v. Langston 6 Eng.Rep. 1128, 1147 (1834), as per Lord Brougham: ‘There are two modes of reading an instrument: where the one destroys and the other preserves, it is the rule of law, and of equity, … that you should lean towards the construction which preserves, than towards that which destroys. Ut res magis valeat quam pereat is a rule of common law and common sense.’ Similarly, art. 5:106 PECL; art. II.-8:106 DCFR; art. 40 CEC; art. 63 CESL. Recommendation regarding the interpretation of article II, paragraph 2, and article VII, paragraph 1, of the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, done in New York, 10 June 1958, adopted by the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law on 7 July 2006 at its thirty-ninth session. Convinced that the wide adoption of the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, done in New York on 10 June 1958,1 has been a significant achievement in the promotion of the rule of law, particularly in the field of international trade,
(31 Article 1191 Code civil; art. 1367 Codice civile; art. 1284 Spanish Civil Code; Ulpian, D. 45.1.80: ‘Quotiens in stipulationibus ambigua oratio est, commodissimum est id accipi quo res, qua de agitur, in tuto sit.’ English law is to the same effect)
Comments