Ad hoc arbitration
别妄想泡我
992次浏览
2020年07月30日 16:08
最佳经验
本文由作者推荐
义乌小倩-鹞鹰怎么读
1–106 There is much to be said in favour of ad hoc arbitration where the sums at stake are large—and in particular, perhaps, where a state or state entity is involved and issues of public policy and sovereignty are likely to arise.(203) In ad hoc arbitration, it is possible to devise a procedure which is fair to both parties, whilst being sensitive to the particular needs of the state party.
Disadvantages
1–107 The principal disadvantage of ad hoc arbitration is that it depends for its full effectiveness on co-operation between the parties and their lawyers, backed up by an adequate legal system in the place of arbitration. It is easy to delay arbitral proceedings by refusing to appoint an arbitrator, or by challenging the impartiality of one of the arbitrators, or by raising jurisdictional issues; and if one of the parties proves difficult or recalcitrant at the outset of the proceedings, there will be no arbitral tribunal in existence and no book of rules available to deal with the situation. It will then be necessary to rely on such provisions of law as may be available to offer the necessary support.(204) Only when an arbitral tribunal is in existence, and a proper set of rules has been established, will an ad hoc arbitration proceed as smoothly as an institutional arbitration if one of the parties fails or refuses to play its part in the proceedings.