Osvrt na praksu Vrhovnog kasacionog suda u arbitražnoj materiji (An Overview of the Practice of the Serbian Supreme Court of Cassation in Matters of Arbitration)
Usklađivanje poslovnog prava Srbije sa pravom EU (2019) ed. V. Radović, Beograd 2019, pp. 370-397.
2019
- 836Usage
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Paper Description
Serbian Abstract: Рад разматра праксу Врховног касационог суда (и раније Врховног суда) у материји арбитражног права. Обухваћене су одлуке донете од 2008. године, како оне објављене, тако и неколико необјављених које су биле доступне аутору. Разматране одлуке баве се, између осталог, питањима арбитражне надлежности, јавног поретка, радноправне арбитраже, арбитрабилности и права меродавног за арбитражни споразум. Иако је Закон о арбитражи донет на основу Модел закона Уједињених нација, наша највиша судска инстанца пропушта да у својим одлукама користи расположиве упоредне изворе и материјале настале током рада на Модел закону који би указали пут ка правилној примени усвојених законских решења. Услед тога, ставови које Врховни касациони суд заузима су често управо супротни слову, циљу и систематици усвојених законских решења. English Abstract: This paper represents an overview of the Serbian Supreme Court of Cassation (formerly Supreme Court) practice in arbitration matters since 2008. Analyzed decisions are both those published, and those unpublished and on file with the author. The issues addressed by the Court include arbitrability, jurisdiction, the law applicable to arbitration agreement, public policy and arbitration in employment matters. Although Serbian Law on Arbitration has been enacted on the basis of the UNCITRAL Model Law, the Supreme Court of Cassation does not appear to resort to travaux preparatoires of the Model Law or to comparative case law or jurisprudence of the Model Law countries when deciding pertinent issues. This, unfortunately, often leads to interpretations which run directly contrary to the letter of the law, its structure and its goals.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know