Papers by Shadat Mohmeded
Arbitral provisional measures are of great importance in protecting the rights of the parties to ... more Arbitral provisional measures are of great importance in protecting the rights of the parties to an arbitration agreement. Arbitration as a dispute mechanism is becoming increasingly powerful due to the ability of tribunals and courts to grant and enforce provisional measures which make the final award meaningful. The importance of provisional measures has increased in recent years as more parties are seeking them, 1 and is likely to grow still more in the coming years. 2 This project examines the problems surrounding arbitral provisional measures in England and Wales; as such problems constitute a threat to current and future arbitration. The thesis aims to identify, analyse and offer solutions to those problems that impede arbitral proceedings. This thesis initially examines the roots and the legislative development of the powers of arbitral tribunals to grant provisional measures and the role of the courts in arbitral proceedings in England. The examination highlights the roots of the problems and demonstrates how the approach towards provisional measures in England has shifted in due course from judicial dominance to arbitral competence, and how the role of the courts has become subsidiary. Further, the analysis highlights the problem of arbitrators in the granting and enforcement of provisional measures across borders, due to the inadequacy of the current Arbitration Act 1996, which provides very limited power to tribunals under its S.38,39 and 48. Additionally, the research aims to demonstrate that arbitral tribunals should be given effective and actual authority to grant arbitral provisional measures in order to comply with the arbitration agreement (party autonomy). Since no dispute mechanism can stand alone as an island, the courts should only become involved in support of the processsubject to the arbitral Acts that provide them with exclusive jurisdiction-where this is necessary in order to avoid conflicting decisions. However, the power of the courts to aid arbitration in granting such measures is limited by Council Regulation (EC) 44/2001 of the European Union, of which England is a member.
Journal of Law and Conflict Resolution, 2018
The International Criminal Court (ICC) established in 2002 under the Rome Statute with significan... more The International Criminal Court (ICC) established in 2002 under the Rome Statute with significant support from African States, comprise thirty percent of the ICC's total membership. After nearly two decades in operation, the ICC has issued a number of indictments to both sitting and ex-African leaders. The African Union has criticized these indictments citing that the court seems to be overly concentrating its efforts on the African continent. African leaders have claimed that the ICC had ignored the atrocities committed by western superpowers especially in the various wars on terror around the world. Another notable concern is the absence of these major powers from the membership of the Rome Statute. In response for example, several African states including Chad, Uganda, South Africa and Malawi have defied the ICC's requests to arrest and extradite Sudan's Omar al-Bashir for prosecution. The latest of such defiance was Rwanda's refusal to arrest al-Bashir when he visited the country in March 2018. This article traced the origin of African dissent against the ICC and examined its implications on justice for victims, international law, as well as the future of the court. This article examined some of the most prominent ICC investigations of African Heads of State and the criticisms against such action for example, state sovereignty and immunity of Heads of State. The article also analyzed the role of the ICC in creating accountability for atrocities in Africa. It concluded that although the ICC has its deficiencies, it remains a very important avenue for ensuring accountability and justice for serious crimes in Africa. This exercise was achieved by extensive review and analysis of international law instruments, national legislation, textbooks, academic articles as well as reports pertaining to the formation and operation of the ICC.
Journal de Radiologie Diagnostique et Interventionnelle, 2013
Nerfs crâniens ; Anatomie ; Diplopie ; IRM Résumé L'étude des nerfs oculomoteurs doit être exhaus... more Nerfs crâniens ; Anatomie ; Diplopie ; IRM Résumé L'étude des nerfs oculomoteurs doit être exhaustive de l'origine (noyau(x) dans le tronc) jusqu'aux muscles effecteurs (orbite). Il faut analyser les troubles visuels en distinguant la baisse d'acuité visuelle des troubles oculomoteurs. L'exploration en imagerie est dominée par l'IRM, incluant coupes fines et injection de gadolinium. Une étude des vaisseaux du polygone de Willis est le plus souvent utile, indispensable en cas d'atteinte du III. Le scanner complémentaire est indispensable pour analyser les foramens, la base du crâne, les parois orbitaires. Une atteinte du VI exige une étude scanner de l'os de la pointe du rocher. L'étude des loges caverneuses est attentive (T2 et T1 après gadolinium et suppression de graisse), toujours comparative. L'atteinte du III est souvent complexe, difficile à identifier de façon précise (complète ou partielle, avec ou sans atteinte pupillaire, associée à d'autres signes neurologiques) et nécessite une étude raisonnée, basée sur les connaissances anatomiques, sémiologiques et pathologiques. Outre la pathologie tumorale, il faut savoir chercher les étiologies malformatives, ischémiques et inflammatoires, moins connues.
Arbitral provisional measures are of great importance in protecting the rights of the parties to ... more Arbitral provisional measures are of great importance in protecting the rights of the parties to an arbitration agreement. Arbitration as a dispute mechanism is becoming increasingly powerful due to the ability of tribunals and courts to grant and enforce provisional measures which make the final award meaningful. The importance of provisional measures has increased in recent years as more parties are seeking them, 1 and is likely to grow still more in the coming years. 2 This project examines the problems surrounding arbitral provisional measures in England and Wales; as such problems constitute a threat to current and future arbitration. The thesis aims to identify, analyse and offer solutions to those problems that impede arbitral proceedings. This thesis initially examines the roots and the legislative development of the powers of arbitral tribunals to grant provisional measures and the role of the courts in arbitral proceedings in England. The examination highlights the roots of the problems and demonstrates how the approach towards provisional measures in England has shifted in due course from judicial dominance to arbitral competence, and how the role of the courts has become subsidiary. Further, the analysis highlights the problem of arbitrators in the granting and enforcement of provisional measures across borders, due to the inadequacy of the current Arbitration Act 1996, which provides very limited power to tribunals under its S.38,39 and 48. Additionally, the research aims to demonstrate that arbitral tribunals should be given effective and actual authority to grant arbitral provisional measures in order to comply with the arbitration agreement (party autonomy). Since no dispute mechanism can stand alone as an island, the courts should only become involved in support of the processsubject to the arbitral Acts that provide them with exclusive jurisdiction-where this is necessary in order to avoid conflicting decisions. However, the power of the courts to aid arbitration in granting such measures is limited by Council Regulation (EC) 44/2001 of the European Union, of which England is a member.
Arbitral provisional measures are of great importance in protecting the rights of the parties to ... more Arbitral provisional measures are of great importance in protecting the rights of the parties to an arbitration agreement. Arbitration as a dispute mechanism is becoming increasingly powerful due to the ability of tribunals and courts to grant and enforce provisional measures which make the final award meaningful. The importance of provisional measures has increased in recent years as more parties are seeking them, 1 and is likely to grow still more in the coming years. 2 This project examines the problems surrounding arbitral provisional measures in England and Wales; as such problems constitute a threat to current and future arbitration. The thesis aims to identify, analyse and offer solutions to those problems that impede arbitral proceedings. This thesis initially examines the roots and the legislative development of the powers of arbitral tribunals to grant provisional measures and the role of the courts in arbitral proceedings in England. The examination highlights the roots of the problems and demonstrates how the approach towards provisional measures in England has shifted in due course from judicial dominance to arbitral competence, and how the role of the courts has become subsidiary. Further, the analysis highlights the problem of arbitrators in the granting and enforcement of provisional measures across borders, due to the inadequacy of the current Arbitration Act 1996, which provides very limited power to tribunals under its S.38,39 and 48. Additionally, the research aims to demonstrate that arbitral tribunals should be given effective and actual authority to grant arbitral provisional measures in order to comply with the arbitration agreement (party autonomy). Since no dispute mechanism can stand alone as an island, the courts should only become involved in support of the processsubject to the arbitral Acts that provide them with exclusive jurisdiction-where this is necessary in order to avoid conflicting decisions. However, the power of the courts to aid arbitration in granting such measures is limited by Council Regulation (EC) 44/2001 of the European Union, of which England is a member.
Uploads
Papers by Shadat Mohmeded