Abstract

This article aims to compare the arbitration agreement of the OHADA legal system to that of the People's Republic of China. In the Chinese legal system the parties to a contract are required to have an arbitration agreement written before the occurrence of any incident in the execution of their contract. The parties must specify in advance, in the said agreement, the chosen arbitration institution for potential disputes. In the OHADA legal system, the parties are free to decide before or during execution of the contract of an arbitration agreement. They may also decide whether in case of a dispute, they would want to refer to an institutional arbitration or an ad hoc arbitration.
According to the chosen legal system the consequences are different.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.