الفهرس 
مقاربة نظريةيوجد فقط 14 صفحة متاحة للعرض العام
 |  | from | 225 |  |  |
| | | from | 225 | | |
المستخلص
summary
Arbitration maritime legal system essential to resolve maritime disputes have arisen from time immemorial for international maritime trade growth and then continued to play its role alongside eliminate the state for the development of this trade and prosperity as a way of vocational and fast to resolve arising from the different relations disputes have to accept the parties, whether they are private or persons General moral agreeing it as a means to resolve their disputes or receiving case and has to accept the different marine communities agreeing on a typical Navy contracts which regulates all maritime trade and covered by the terms and conditions of the establishment of centers of maritime arbitration
institutional and various free areas.
And has the acceptance of different countries to update them arbitral laws or enacting the arbitral new laws compete with each other to provide all the facilities of the International Arbitration and remove obstacles on the way and recognize Batvaqath and its provisions and then have to accept the national judiciary in these countries Ptvseerath liberal to this arbitration laws in favor of the entry into force of arbitration agreements and the continuation of the arbitral proceedings and respect for provisions arbitration in the framework of increased cooperation with the various arbitral tribunals have finally respect international community, which was accelerated towards the conclusion of international treaties and to develop model regulations arbitral arbitration and laws that make arbitration language of the age and its reality.
On the subject of our study of arbitration in maritime disputes and the beginning of the contract of maritime transport of goods it may Tjazpth various marine conflicting interests arising from the economic and political conditions which led the international community to chat to reconcile those interests and to establish a kind of balance with each other and most important of these attempts represented in all of the Brussels Treaty of 1924 and its amendments and the Convention of 1978 Hamburg Although the Hamburg Convention overtake the Brussels Convention in observance of the variables
That may arise on the navigation in the modern era and also addressed to the responsibility of the shipping carrier, it is where the application Hamburg has marked clearly and breadth exceeded, which came in the Brussels Convention in terms of transport international, who underwent its provisions or the quality of maritime transport, which is subject to her or cargo transported on them.
In terms of the quality of marine transportation, the Hamburg apply to the international transport of goods contracts, whether fixed charge or any other document evidencing the contract of maritime transport, it did not comply with such as Brussels application on all bills of lading, and is characterized by Hamburg Treaty as well as the broad scope of application to the case of maritime transport by carriers multiple or state maritime transport sequential bail direct charging while ago Brussels Treaty noted, and is characterized by Hamburg Treaty for Brussels from the entry into force provisions of the cargo on the deck and it prescribed the conditions, with regard to the responsibility of the shipping carrier, we find that Hamburg is distinct from Brussels despite amendments in terms of the time scale of the liability of the carrier or the legal basis for the liability of the carrier or cases of liability or exemption legal ones, it is where the time scale of the responsibility of the maritime carrier, the Hamburg has expanded the range of time for the application to include the addition to the marine phase of the transport previous stage on shipping and the subsequent phase of the discharge and contrary to Brussels, which was the time scale of the responsibility in accordance with the shipping carrier and is limited to only the marine phase of the transport.
And brought Brussels Treaty of 1924, the absence of the recognition of arbitration of maritime or organization, leaving it to national laws concerning arbitration trade in general in different countries within the framework of freedom of the parties which ultimately led to the maritime arbitrations concentrate in certain places of the world where the State of the range carriers of the consequences on the choice of the place of arbitration of related procedures applicable effects as well as the law applicable to the subject of law, so the Hamburg due credited with being the first international specialized treaty in the maritime arbitration is recognized by a legal system has a large dispute resolution and the organization of some of its provisions to the provisions of peremptory benefits especially with to the place of arbitration and the law applicable to the subject of the dispute. In this investigation of the balance between the interests of carriers and shippers, and eliminate some of maritime arbitration centers monopolistic practices in London, New York and Paris in favor of the adoption of a new system of arbitration Maritime involved in building more global maritime arbitration centers based on equal legal centers and away from the economic and monopoly control.
And disadvantages of bias and favoritism constitute the provisions which the provisions of the Treaty shall apply guide and mentor of workers in the maritime field has swiveled Hamburg and distinguish it from Brussels to address the provisions of the statute of limitations suit responsibility in a manner prolongs the period of limitation in order to make it two years after it had been one year in light of Brussels in order to make it easier for shippers and investigation to their interests as well as the Hamburg stated explicitly that the statute of limitations period lawsuit liability apply to both the lawsuit and the lawsuit arbitration and that it deserted him to Brussels, which were not provided for in the base to arbitration as a means to resolve maritime disputes and led to a frequency in the interpretation of the term lawsuit, which become obsolete passage of the year And if that includes the lawsuit only as gold American justice or extends to the case of arbitration as the English judiciary went Finally, the Egyptian legislator has taken the overall stipulations in Hamburg Treaty and within maritime commerce Law No. 8 of 1990, but with some minor differences are intended to provide a measure Egyptians greater protection for shippers.
We have addressed in the first section of our study arbitration privacy in the contract of maritime transport of goods we have explained in the first quarter international transport of goods held and public properties and characters and rights obligations shipper and the carrier marine transport contract and responsibility, In the second chapter we dealt with arbitration privacy in the contract of carriage in terms of the arbitration agreement and conditions his health and the scope of its agreement and applicable law to it. In Part II we had the privacy of arbitration in the field of collision and sea rescue, and in the first chapter Pena intended clash Maritime and types and situations and privacy of arbitration in which, In the second chapter we dealt with research intended to rescue Maritime and situations and conditions and the privacy of arbitration in which the venue of the arbitral tribunal and the arbitration award which, in Part III Arzina on the study of the arbitration ruling in maritime disputes In the first chapter we dealt with the issuance of the arbitration award Maritime and ways to challenge it in Chapter Aalthany we dealt with the implementation of the rule of maritime arbitration both in terms of implementation and the Optional compulsory arbitration, and in the finale Arsine to view the topic in As a general l’ve listed a summary of the message and we ended the findings and recommendations, which in our study where we ended.