2026-yil, 3-son · 81–89-betlar
Expanding party autonomy through institutional innovation: choice of law and the tashkent international commercial court
Annotatsiya
Taraflar muxtoriyati transchegaraviy bitimlar uchun neytral va murakkab huquqiy bazani tanlash erkinligini beruvchi xalqaro tijorat huquqining tortishish markazi sifatida umumjahon miqyosida tan olingan. Biroq, rivojlanayotgan yurisdiksiyalarda ushbu huquqning qonuniy tan olinishi ko'pincha milliy sudlarning proteksionistik tendensiyalari bilan to'qnashadi, ular xorijiy huquqni tanlash to'g'risidagi kelishuvlarni haqiqiy emas deb topish uchun keng "ommaviy tartib" (public order) istisnolarini tez-tez qo'llaydilar. Ushbu maqola O'zbekistonda mazkur bo'shliqni to'ldirishga qaratilgan muhim institutsional innovatsiya sifatida "Enterprise Uzbekistan" xabi doirasida Toshkent xalqaro tijorat sudining (TICC) tashkil etilishini tanqidiy tahlil qiladi. O'zbekistonning nizolarni hal qilishdagi ikki tomonlama tizimini xalqaro paradigmalar (Gaaga prinsiplari, SICC va AIFC) bilan taqqoslab, ushbu tadqiqot ixtisoslashtirilgan tijorat sudlari huquqni tanlash to'g'risidagi kelishuvlarni ijro etish, shuningdek, an'anaviy fuqarolik huquqi doktrinalari va texnologik savdo o'rtasidagi ziddiyatlarni yumshatish uchun zarur ekanligini isbotlaydi.
Abstract
Party autonomy is universally recognized as the gravitational center of international commercial law, granting actors the freedom to select a neutral and sophisticated legal framework for their cross-border transactions. However, in emerging and transitioning jurisdictions, the statutory recognition of this right often clashes with the protectionist tendencies of domestic courts, which frequently invoke broad "public order" exceptions to invalidate foreign choice-of-law clauses. This article critically analyzes the establishment of the Tashkent International Commercial Court (TICC) within the "Enterprise Uzbekistan" hub as a vital institutional innovation designed to bridge this gap. By comparing Uzbekistan's dual-track dispute resolution framework with international paradigms—such as the Hague Principles, the Singapore International Commercial Court (SICC), and the Astana International Financial Centre (AIFC)—this study argues that specialized, independent commercial courts are essential not only for enforcing choice-of-law agreements but also for mitigating the friction between rigid algorithmic/technological commerce and traditional civil law doctrines.
Iqtibos uchun
Davronbek Abdugaffarov. Expanding party autonomy through institutional innovation: choice of law and the tashkent international commercial court // Adolat. – 2026. – № 3. – С. 81–89.