The incidence of disruptive circumstances of the balance initially projected by the parties to an international contract may put an end to it or render it an excessively onerous load for one of the contracting parties. In that context, the role of the arbitrator is vital. The mission of the arbitrator is particularly problematic in the situation that the parties had not formally predicted for the changes probable to affect the performance of the contract in their agreement. The arbitrator will be asked to decide on the destiny of the contract confronted by execution difficulties. Supposedly, two alternatives are presented. The first is visceral related to the principle pacta sunt servanda. The arbitrator can not undo the contract in order to tie him up again. The second meaning of the contractual relationship is found in the doctrine rebus sic stantibus as a basis for adaptation of the contract by the arbitrator. Our opinion consists in demonstrating that the opposition between the principle pacta sunt servanda and the principle rebus sic stantibus is only prima facie and that in fact the two principles are complementary.
Al-Bejawi, Dr. Imad Hammadi
"The Sustainability of the International Contract between the Notions of: “Pacta Sunt Servanda” and “Things thus Standing”: Reflections on the Interpretative Power of the Arbitrator,"
Journal Sharia and Law: Vol. 2020:
81, Article 10.
Available at: https://scholarworks.uaeu.ac.ae/sharia_and_law/vol2020/iss81/10