Non-intervention principle and its possible lege ferenda enhancement in the chilean international commercial arbitration law
On the first chapter of this work, I am going to analyze the interventions of national Courts authorized by the Chilean arbitration law and see if the regulations are self operative or if they need further regulation in order to work properly. In those cases were the provisions are not self operative or the current writing difficult their interpretation and application I will propose modifications and the incorporation of amendments. For this task I will compare, when possible, the Chilean provisions with the corresponding provisions of the Peruvian and Irish arbitration laws and make a parallel with the Chilean international arbitration regulations. The reason why the Peruvian and Irish arbitration laws were chosen to develop this work is because these laws have been recently enacted and adjusted to the amendments of the UNCITRAL model law of 2006, so they can reflect the last tendencies in the subject. These laws may include interesting or relevant provisions that may be included in the Chilean law. On the second chapter, I will refer to the decision of the Constitutional Court referred to article 5 of the Chilean law and check if the interventions consecrated on the conservation, disciplinary and economical competences of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Republic of Chile are applicable to the processes under the international commercial arbitration law. Particularly, I will focus my work on trying to understand the legal nature of the ruling of Chilean Courts of Appeal that decides the set aside consecrated on article 34 of the Chilean arbitration law. Having established the mentioned legal nature I will try to demonstrate that the legal nature of that ruling does not entitle anyone to invoke the Chilean legal remedy of complaint against that ruling, leaving the non-intervention principle intact.
Memoria (magister en derecho internacional)