布拉格的规则并不像看起来那么糟糕

M. Saavedra, Eduardo Dibos Figueroa
{"title":"布拉格的规则并不像看起来那么糟糕","authors":"M. Saavedra, Eduardo Dibos Figueroa","doi":"10.21678/FORSETI.V0I10.1096","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"With increasing frequency, it is pointed out that international arbitration has become a costly, long and inefficient dispute resolution system. As an attempt to solve this problem, in 2018 the so-called Prague Rules were launched, an instrument of soft law to conduct arbitration under the tradition of inquisitive civil procedure. Thus, the authors analyze the Prague Rules and compare them with the IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence. The authors review the rules on the display of documents, hearings, witnesses, experts e inferences. They suggest that, although the premises on which the Prague Rules are based are not entirely correct, they can be useful for judicial litigants with lesser experience in international arbitration. They consider that exogenous variables, such as the skills of the arbitrators and the legal culture of the lawyers, will affect their success or failure.","PeriodicalId":248636,"journal":{"name":"Forseti: Revista de Derecho","volume":"219 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Las reglas de Praga no son tan malas como parecen\",\"authors\":\"M. Saavedra, Eduardo Dibos Figueroa\",\"doi\":\"10.21678/FORSETI.V0I10.1096\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"With increasing frequency, it is pointed out that international arbitration has become a costly, long and inefficient dispute resolution system. As an attempt to solve this problem, in 2018 the so-called Prague Rules were launched, an instrument of soft law to conduct arbitration under the tradition of inquisitive civil procedure. Thus, the authors analyze the Prague Rules and compare them with the IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence. The authors review the rules on the display of documents, hearings, witnesses, experts e inferences. They suggest that, although the premises on which the Prague Rules are based are not entirely correct, they can be useful for judicial litigants with lesser experience in international arbitration. They consider that exogenous variables, such as the skills of the arbitrators and the legal culture of the lawyers, will affect their success or failure.\",\"PeriodicalId\":248636,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Forseti: Revista de Derecho\",\"volume\":\"219 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-07-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Forseti: Revista de Derecho\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21678/FORSETI.V0I10.1096\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forseti: Revista de Derecho","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21678/FORSETI.V0I10.1096","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

越来越多的人指出,国际仲裁已成为一种昂贵、耗时和效率低下的争议解决机制。为了解决这一问题,2018年推出了所谓的《布拉格规则》(Prague Rules),这是一种软法工具,根据调查性民事诉讼的传统进行仲裁。因此,笔者对《布拉格规则》进行了分析,并与《国际律师协会证据取得规则》进行了比较。作者回顾了关于文件展示、听证会、证人、专家和推论的规则。他们认为,虽然《布拉格规则》所依据的前提并不完全正确,但对于在国际仲裁方面经验较少的司法诉讼当事人是有用的。他们认为外生变量,如仲裁员的技能和律师的法律文化,会影响他们的成功或失败。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Las reglas de Praga no son tan malas como parecen
With increasing frequency, it is pointed out that international arbitration has become a costly, long and inefficient dispute resolution system. As an attempt to solve this problem, in 2018 the so-called Prague Rules were launched, an instrument of soft law to conduct arbitration under the tradition of inquisitive civil procedure. Thus, the authors analyze the Prague Rules and compare them with the IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence. The authors review the rules on the display of documents, hearings, witnesses, experts e inferences. They suggest that, although the premises on which the Prague Rules are based are not entirely correct, they can be useful for judicial litigants with lesser experience in international arbitration. They consider that exogenous variables, such as the skills of the arbitrators and the legal culture of the lawyers, will affect their success or failure.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信