Virtual arbitration hearing: arbitrator's discretion or the right of the parties?

S. Kravtsov
{"title":"Virtual arbitration hearing: arbitrator's discretion or the right of the parties?","authors":"S. Kravtsov","doi":"10.21564/2414-990x.164.288034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Today, international commercial arbitration remains one of the most effective ways to resolve disputes complicated by a foreign element. Parties to a dispute, preferring arbitration, wish to obtain the desired result in the shortest possible time. This is achieved because the parties to the arbitration proceedings themselves are endowed with an arsenal of rights that are not inherent in national courts: the right to choose a particular arbitration, the composition of the arbitral tribunal, and the law to be applied in the dispute. This is a manifestation of the \"autonomy of will\" of the parties to the dispute. However, despite such a broad scope of powers, some powers of the arbitral tribunal, which is chosen by the parties, cannot be limited. Although the discretionary powers of international commercial arbitration are regulated by national arbitration laws and rules, their exercise may sometimes contradict the fundamental principles and standards of effective arbitration. One of such powers is the right to determine the format of arbitration hearings, since it is by exercising this right that the arbitral tribunal may make its own decision without taking into account the views of the parties to the dispute. The article provides a comparative legal analysis of arbitration legislation, rules and law enforcement practice of national courts with regard to the possibility of determining a virtual hearing as the most efficient format for consideration of a case. Particular attention is paid to the imperfection of Ukrainian legislative regulation and the lack of a single, consistent court practice on these issues.  Therefore, the conclusions propose to eliminate the shortcomings in the legal consolidation of such definitional constructs as \"hearing\" and \"oral hearing\".","PeriodicalId":417369,"journal":{"name":"Problems of Legality","volume":" 55","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Problems of Legality","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21564/2414-990x.164.288034","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Today, international commercial arbitration remains one of the most effective ways to resolve disputes complicated by a foreign element. Parties to a dispute, preferring arbitration, wish to obtain the desired result in the shortest possible time. This is achieved because the parties to the arbitration proceedings themselves are endowed with an arsenal of rights that are not inherent in national courts: the right to choose a particular arbitration, the composition of the arbitral tribunal, and the law to be applied in the dispute. This is a manifestation of the "autonomy of will" of the parties to the dispute. However, despite such a broad scope of powers, some powers of the arbitral tribunal, which is chosen by the parties, cannot be limited. Although the discretionary powers of international commercial arbitration are regulated by national arbitration laws and rules, their exercise may sometimes contradict the fundamental principles and standards of effective arbitration. One of such powers is the right to determine the format of arbitration hearings, since it is by exercising this right that the arbitral tribunal may make its own decision without taking into account the views of the parties to the dispute. The article provides a comparative legal analysis of arbitration legislation, rules and law enforcement practice of national courts with regard to the possibility of determining a virtual hearing as the most efficient format for consideration of a case. Particular attention is paid to the imperfection of Ukrainian legislative regulation and the lack of a single, consistent court practice on these issues.  Therefore, the conclusions propose to eliminate the shortcomings in the legal consolidation of such definitional constructs as "hearing" and "oral hearing".
虚拟仲裁听证:仲裁员的自由裁量权还是当事人的权利?
如今,国际商事仲裁仍是解决因外国因素而复杂化的争端的最有效方式之一。选择仲裁的争端各方都希望在尽可能短的时间内获得理想的结果。之所以能做到这一点,是因为仲裁程序的当事方本身就拥有国内法院所不具备的一系列权利:选择特定仲裁的权利、仲裁庭的组成以及在争议中适用的法律。这体现了争端各方的 "意思自治"。然而,尽管权力范围如此广泛,由当事人选择的仲裁庭的某些权力却不能受到限制。尽管国际商事仲裁的自由裁量权受到各国仲裁法和仲裁规则的规范,但其行使有时可能与有效仲裁的基本原则和标准相抵触。其中一项权力就是决定仲裁听证形式的权利,因为仲裁庭正是通过行使这项权利,可以在不考虑争议各方意见的情况下做出自己的决定。文章对各国法院的仲裁立法、规则和执法实践进行了比较法律分析,探讨了将虚拟审理确定为最有效的案件审理形式的可能性。文章特别关注了乌克兰立法条例的不完善以及在这些问题上缺乏单一、一致的法院实践。 因此,结论建议消除 "听证 "和 "口头听证 "等定义结构在法律整合方面的缺陷。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信