Search results

In several recent judgments, the Jordanian Court of Cassation has found that using arbitration to resolve individual labor disputes is null. The aforementioned approach which constituted a departure from the well-established former approach that the same court has followed has been confirmed by the new amendments that the Jordanian Arbitration Act has seen in 2018. In view of this, this study aims to highlight and critically analyze the above-mentioned court’s decisions and the new amendments pertaining to arbitration clauses from a Jordanian Labor Law perspective and the distinct characteristics rooted in it to find out the extent to which applying arbitration in such a context is acceptable or not.

To examine how effective are the approaches followed by the Jordanian courts and the legislator in ruling the unacceptability of arbitration clauses in individual labor contracts and to observe to what extent it has been successful in this relation, this work makes use of the secondary data available in this regard as the main method to complete such an examination and this includes the relevant different legislations, court’s decisions and jurisprudence. By critically analyzing and comparing the various data contained in these secondary data sources, this work will identify the problems associated with such approaches and accordingly bring up different recommendations and conclusions.

While the current author do largely agree with the conclusions that have been reached recently by the aforementioned courts, it is submitted that these courts and the legislator have not dealt with such a matter in an adequate and comprehensive manner as they should have spilled more ink on this area of law. Furthermore, this work argues that while the principles that necessitate arbitration shall be respected, the distinct characteristics of the labor law warrant a more careful approach than actually followed by the competent authorities.

Taking into consideration the recent different approaches followed by the Jordanian courts and legislator in ruling the unacceptability of arbitration clauses in individual labor contracts, it would not be a surprise to say that there is no comprehensive and updated scholarly work which has either examined such different approaches or addressed its implications. Accordingly, this work derives its originality and value from being the first and most updated work that examines and addresses such a thorny matter.

This study aims to examine the application of the fraud exception to the autonomy principle that governs the work of letters of credit in both Jordanian and English law. While it has been reiterated that the application of such exception before the English courts is difficult, this study highlights and critically analyzes some of the reasons that lie behind such a difficulty. Moreover, this study compares the English approach with the Jordanian approach to this specific area of law to find out what each can benefit from the approach of the other. The extent to which both approaches have been successful in applying such an exception will be examined thoroughly in this paper.

To examine how effective is the approaches followed by the English and Jordanian Courts in applying the fraud exception in this context, this work makes use of the secondary data available in this regard as the main method to complete such an examination. By critically analyzing and comparing the various data contained in these sources, this work identifies the problems associated with such approaches.

This work suggests that while the autonomy principle in letters of credit has what shall maintain its role as an important principle, the fraud exception application shall be facilitated. It further submits that the English Courts attitude to this specific area of law is somehow ambiguous and intertwined as it does not distinguish between two different stages that are existent in this context, namely, the submission of the documents stage “the prerequisite” that in case of submitting genuine, truthful and complying documents would activate the autonomy principle and the following stage which starts after activating the autonomy principle and which to it a fraud exception can be applied.

This work proposes that a beneficiary of a letter of credit shall satisfy a prerequisite before it can be said that he is protected under the autonomy principle. Such a prerequisite dictates that he shall submit genuine, truthful and complying documents to activate the autonomy principle and once the beneficiary submits such documents it can be said that the autonomy principle, which fraud is an exception to it, has been activated. Furthermore, this work proposes that English Courts shall adopt an approach similar to the Jordanian approach in relation to the application of the fraud exception, whereas the latter requires proving neither the beneficiary’s fraudulent intent nor his knowledge of it but rather applies a more realistic test concerned merely with the goods’ quality and quantity.

On two different occasions, the Jordanian Constitutional Court has ruled that Articles 51 and 54 of the Jordanian Arbitration Act no. 31 of the year 2001 are unconstitutional and null. In view of this, this paper aims to attempt to give the reader a brief preview of the Jordanian Arbitration Act, the Jordanian Constitution and the Jordanian Constitutional Court. It also highlights and critically analyzes the Jordanian Constitutional Court two decisions pertaining to the Arbitration Act and its special implications in this regard from the perspective of arbitration law and the distinct characteristics embedded in it.

To examine how effective is the approach followed by the Constitutional Court in ruling the unconstitutionality of the aforementioned Articles, this work makes use of the primary and secondary data available in this regard as the main method to complete such an examination. By critically analyzing and comparing the various data contained in these sources, this work identifies the problems associated with such decisions.

This work submits that while the Constitutional Court has rested its rulings largely on constitutional principles, concerns arising from the Arbitration Act perspective have not been dealt with adequately by the Court. Furthermore, it argues that while the principles of the constitution shall be respected, the distinct characteristics of the arbitration law warrant a more careful approach than actually followed by the Court.

Taking into consideration the importance of arbitration as an alternative mean for dispute resolution, the Jordanian legislator has addressed the application of arbitration as early as the year 1953. However, while the Constitutional Court’s questionable approach to the aforementioned articles would necessarily hinder the use of arbitration, no comprehensive scholarly work has either examined such approach or addressed its implications. Accordingly, this work derives its originality and value from being the first of its kind to examine and address such a matter.

In different recent judgments, the Jordanian Court of Cassation, among many other Jordanian Courts, has found that a limited liability company's shareholder may be held liable in addition to the company itself as to claims related to the company's debits and different obligations. While the aforementioned approach does constitute a departure from the well-established former approach that the same Court has followed for a long period, the Court have unsurprisingly brought up different interpretations to the insufficient provisions that the Jordanian Companies' Law no. 22 of the year 1997 does contain pertaining this specific area of law. Accordingly, this paper aims to attempt to point out and critically examine the aforementioned Courts' decisions and law provisions to demonstrate the extent to which limited liability companies in Jordan are truly limited in liability and whether such Courts have pierced the corporate veil for adequate reasons.

To examine the extent to which limited liability companies in Jordan are truly limited in liability, this work uses the most relevant secondary data available in this relation as the main method to complete such examination and this shall include different interrelated law provisions, case law and jurisprudence. Through critically analyzing and comparing such data, this work will identify the problems connected to this specific area of law and accordingly proposes different recommendations and conclusions.

This work submits that the aforementioned Courts and Legislator have not dealt with such a matter in an adequate and comprehensive manner and that they should have addressed this area of law in a different and more specific way. Furthermore, this work argues that while the reasons behind the Courts' decisions shall be respected, the distinct characteristics that brought up limited liability companies into practice shall be also respected and left intact.

Taking into consideration the recent different approach followed by the Jordanian Courts to this specific area of law, and as far as the author is aware, it would not be surprising to say that there is no comprehensive and updated scholarly work which has either examined such an issue or addressed its implications from technical and legal standpoints. This paper receives its originality and value from being the first work that examines and addresses such important matter.