Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-nr4z6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-16T02:36:08.124Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Arbitration Despite the Parties?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 May 2009

T. Varady
T. Varady
Affiliation:
Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Novi Sad.
Get access

Extract

Arbitration is an institution which preceded courts; yet shortly after the appearance of the latter, arbitration assumed the position of the younger (and weaker) brother. In the course of history, this predicament has only been confirmed and aggravated. Courts of justice have become the representatives of the ‘normal’ settlement of disputes, their legitimacy has been beyond doubt Arbitration has been reduced to an exception, the limits and the functioning of which have been firmly been controlled by courts. There have been revolts against this plight, yet there is practically only one area in which such revolts have really been successful. This is in the domain of international trade. Today, it is an uncontested fact that arbitration is the dominant method of settling international trade disputes; and at the same time, international commercial arbitration has become an almost completely self-sufficient institution. While gaining ground and strength, international commercial arbitration has also gained self-confidence. It has been stressed with increasing frequency (and determination) that the self-reliance of international commercial arbitration is a virtue, and that it advances broader common causes. In the opening sentence of his article on court intervention in arbitral proceedings, Delaume stresses: ‘It is generally recognized that, in order to be fully effective, transnational arbitration must be freed from judicial interference.’

Type
Research Article
Information
Netherlands International Law Review , Volume 39 , Special Issue S1: Law and Reality , October 1992 , pp. 351 - 376
Copyright
Copyright © T.M.C. Asser Press 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Delaume, G.R., ‘Court Intervention in Arbitral Proceedings’Google Scholar, in Carbonneau, Th.E., ed, Resolving Transnational Disputes Through International Arbitration (1984) p. 195 at p. 195.Google Scholar

2. McClendon, J.S. and Goodman, R.E., International Commercial Arbitration in New York (1986) at p. 3.Google Scholar

3. Schmitthoff, C., ‘Defective Arbitration Clauses’Google Scholar, in Cheng, Chia-jui, ed., Clive M. Schmitthoff's Select Essays on International Trade Law, p. 608.Google Scholar

4. Most importantly, the 1958 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (with 84 Member States by January 1992); the 1961 European Convention on International Commercial Arbitration (with 21 Member States by January 1992) with the 1962 Agreement Relating to Application of the European Convention on International Commercial Arbitration (entered into between the Member States of the Council of Europe); and the 1965 Washington Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and National of Other States (ICSID Convention, with 97 Member States by January 1992).

5. Carbooneau, Th.E., Alternative Dispute Resolution (1989) p. 66.Google Scholar

6. Eisemann, F., ‘La clause arbitrale pathologique’Google Scholar, in Associazione Italiana per 1'Arbitrato, ed., Commercial Arbitration, Essays in Memoriam Eugenio Minoli (1974) p. 129.Google Scholar

7. Robert, J., ‘La règle morale dans l'arbitrage commercial international’Google Scholar, in Associazione Italiana per l'Arbitrato, ed., Commercial Arbitration, Essays in Memoriam Eugenio Minoli (1974) at p. 447.Google Scholar

8. See in more detail Varady, T., ‘On Appointing Authorities in International Commercial Arbitration’, 2 Emory Journal of International Dispute Resolution (1988) p. 311.Google Scholar

9. Hascher, D.T., ‘European Convention on International Commercial Arbitration of 1961, Commentary’, XV Yearbook Comm. Arb'n (1990) at pp. 638–639.Google Scholar

10. There are no statistics available, yet interviews with fellow arbitrators have confirmed the impression that in only somewhat more than the half of cases submitted would the parties get the precise name of the institution right. (There are between 300 and 400 cases submitted yearly to the FTCA.)

11. Award No. T-43/86 of 12 June 1989, at pp. 102–103 (unpublished).

12. Award No. 151/1984 of 3 December 1984, reported in XV Yearbook Comm. Arb'n (1990) p. 63.

13. Hannex Corp. v. GMI, Inc. and others, reported in XV Yearbook Comm. Arb'n (1990) p. 594.Google Scholar

14. Ibid. p. 599.

15. Ibid.

16. Wünsche Handelsgesellschaft v. Coop. S. Maria srl, IPRax (1984) pp. 148–150Google Scholar; NJW (1983) p. 1267.Google Scholar

17. XV Yearbook Comm. Arb'n (1990) at p. 663.

18. Raeschke-Kessler, H., ‘Neuere Entwicklungen im Bereich der Internationalen Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit’, NJW (1988) p. 3041 at p. 3043.Google Scholar

19. Raeschke-Kessler, , loc. cit. n. 18, p. 3044.Google Scholar

20. Schlosser, P., Das Recht der internationalen privaten Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit, 2nd edn. (1989) pp. 286–287.Google Scholar

21. Indeed, in a similar case, where the arbitration clause contained a cryptic reference to ‘the official Chamber of Commerce in Paris’, the plaintiff seized first the Paris Tribunal de grande instance, which designated after a référé proceeding the ICC ‘comme centre organisateur de procédure d'arbitrage’. (See Société Asland v. Société European Energy Corporation, Tribunal de grande instance de Paris 13 12 1988, Rev. arb. (1990) p. 521Google Scholar; 2 DIS Mitteilungen (1989) p. 67Google Scholar — comment by M. Bühler).

22. United States District Court, District of Columbia, 505 F. Supp. 141 Decision of 12 January 1981.

23. Ibid. p. 143.

24. Ibid.

25. 693 F.2d 1094 — Decision of 12 November 1982. Cert. denied 464 U.S. 815.

26. United States District Court, S.D. New York, 411 F. Supp. 1404 — Decision of 7 November 1975.

27. Ibid, at p. 1407.

28. App. Div., 434 N.Y.S. 2d 359 — Decision of 30 December 1981.

29. Ibid, at p. 363.

30. 636 F.2d 75 (1981) — Decision of 9 January 1981.

31. Ibid, at p. 77.

32. République de Guinée v. Chambre Arbitrale de Paris, Tribunal de grande instance. Judgments of 30 May 1986, 30 October 1986, and 28 January 1987, Paris, Rev. arb. (1987) p. 371.

33. The Tribunal de grande instance rendered three decisions in the controversy between the Republic of Guinea and the Chambre Arbitrale de Paris (Rev. arb. (1987) p. 371). Avoidance of the arbitration agreement on grounds of lost confidence was granted in the third judgment of 28 January 1987. Idem at p. 380.

34. 442 F. Supp. 907 (1978) at p. 908.

35. Ibid. — Decision of 10 January 1978.

36. English translation as reported in XV Yearbook Comm. Arb'n (1990) at p. 367.

37. Oberste Gerichtshof 9 09 1987Google Scholar — 3 Ob 80/87, IPRax (1989) p. 302, with a comment of Heller, K. (‘Zur Vollstreckung eines jugoslawischen Schiedsspruches in Österreich’) at p. 315Google Scholar. Excerpts in English in XV Yearbook Comm. Arb'n (1990) p. 367.

38. XV Yearbook Comm. Arb'n (1990) at p. 368.

39. Heller, , loc. cit n. 37, p. 316.Google Scholar

40. Preliminary Award made in ICC Case No. 2321 (1974), reported in I Yearbook Comm. Arb'n (1976) p. 133; Federal Tribunal 16 April 1984, discussed in Klein, F.E., ‘Zur Ernennung von Schiedsrichtern durch im voraus bezeichnete Dritte’, IPRax (1986) p. 53.Google Scholar

41. I Yearbook Comm. Arb'n (1976) at p. 134. (References in the Award to articles of the ICC Rules are to the old, pre-1975 Rules.)

42. Klein, , loc. cit. n. 40, p. 54.Google Scholar

43. See the text of the 1979 Act in V Yearbook Comm. Arb'n (1980) p. 239.

44. Al Haddad Bros. Ent. Inc. v. M/S Agapi … etc., 635 F. Supp. 205 (1986)Google Scholar — Decision of 8 May 1986. (In this case it was agreed that disputes shall be solved by two arbitrators nominated by the parties and — if the two arbitrators could not agree — the arbitrators shall nominate an umpire.)

45. Ibid. p. 210.

46. Corte d'Appello di Firenze 13 04 1978Google Scholar, Rassegna dell'arbitrato (1978) p. 420Google Scholar. English excerpts in Gaja, G., International Commercial Arbitration — New York Convention, V.92.1.Google Scholar

47. Queen's Bench Division 7 February 1979 — [1979] 3 WLR 1320.

48. 508 F.2d 969, at p. 976 (2d Cir. 1974).

49. United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, 517 F. Supp. 949 — Decision of 9 June 1981.

50. See Schlosser, , loc. cit. n. 20, p. 228 fn. 5.Google Scholar

51. Société Dauphin O.T.A. v. Société Decaux Paris Publicité Abribus, Cour de Cassation 21 10 1981, Rev. arb. (1982) p. 264.Google Scholar

52. Schlosser, , loc. cit n. 20, p. 229.Google Scholar

53. The limits of this freedom are not uncontested. It is beyond doubt, however, that arbitration tribunals have a greater freedom from substantive municipal law than courts have. See two recent assessments, Dasser, F., Internationale Schiedsgerichte und lex mer catoria (1989)Google Scholar; Carbonneau, Th.E., ed., Lex Mercatoria and Arbitration (1990).Google Scholar

54. 22 ILM(1983)p. 752.

55. Cour d'appel de Paris 12 July 1984, 23 ILM (1984) p. 1048. Regarding the argument with respect to the terms of reference the French court stated:

‘it would not be possible to explain how the terms of reference, in which the A.R.E. claims immunity from jurisdiction and maintains, before any arguments on the merits, that there was no arbitration agreement, could replace such an agreement;’ (at p. 1054).

56. Westland Helicopters Limited v. Arab Organization for Industrialization, United Arab Emirates, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, State of Qatar, Arab Republic of Egypt, and Arab British Helicopter Company, ICC Case No. 3879, Interim Award of 5 March 1984, 23 ILM (1984) p. 1071.

57. The Swiss courts found that there was no arbitration agreement between Westland Helicopters and the four states, yet the award was annulled only in regard to Egypt, in the absence of challenge by the other three states. 28 ILM (1989) p. 687.

58. Federal Tribunal 14 November 1979, in Arab Republic of Libya v. Wetco, , 102 Semaine Judiciare (1980) p. 443.Google Scholar

59. See Rubellin-Devichi, J., ‘L'arbitrage et les tiers — Le droit de l'arbitrage: les solutions juridictionnelles’, Rev. arb. (1988) p. 515Google Scholar; Chappelle, A., ‘Note on Société Sponsor A.B. c. Lestrade’, Rev. arb. (1988) p. 153Google Scholar; Samuel, A., Jurisdictional Problems in International Commercial Arbitration (1989) pp. 102–106.Google Scholar

60. Decision of 4 March 1985, 609 F. Supp. 75 (1985), also reported in XII Yearbook Comm. Arb'n (1987) p. 532; and Decision of 19 December 1988, 702 F. Supp. 1005.

61. 609 F. Supp. at p. 78.

62. 702 F. Supp. 1005 (1988) at 1014.

63. Ibid. at p. 1018.

64. Ibid. at p. 1023.

65. Marchetto, v. De Kalb Genetics Corporation, 711 F. Supp. 936 (1989).Google Scholar

66. See a survey of responses in different legal systems, Gaillard, E., ‘L'arbitrage multipartite et la consolidation des procédures arbitrales connexes’, ILA, Report of the Sixty-Third Conference (Warsaw 1988) p. 478Google Scholar; see also conflicting decisions which emerged in the U.S. court practice, Domke on Commercial Arbitration (revised by G. Wilner) (1990) para. 27.02; Samuel, , op. cit. n. 59, pp. 106–117Google Scholar; Barron, W., ‘Court-Ordered Consolidation of Arbitration Proceedings in the United States’, 4 J. Int. Arb. (1987) pp. 1, 81Google Scholar; Branson, D. and Wallace, R., ‘Court-Ordered Consolidated Arbitrations in the United States: Recent Authority Assures Parties a Choice’, 5 J. Int. Arb. (1988) pp. 1, 90Google Scholar; Sociétés Sysmode et Sysmode France v. Sociétés Metra Hos et Sema, , Cour d'appel de Paris 8 12 1988Google Scholar, Rev. arb. (1990) p. 150, with a note by Ch. Jarrossen.

67. David, R., Arbitration in International Trade (1985) pp. 195–196.Google Scholar

68. David, , loc. cit. n. 67, p. 196.Google Scholar

69. Carbonneau, , loc. cit. n. 53, p. 2.Google Scholar

70. 609 F. Supp. 75 (1985).

71. See a list of U.S. decisions espousing the ‘strong federal policy favoring arbitration’, in Carbonneau, , loc. cit. n. 5, pp. 284–285.Google Scholar

72. 460 U.S. 1(1983).

73. 609 F. Supp. 75 (1985) at 77.

74. See, e.g., Samuel, , op. cit. n. 59, p. 96Google Scholar; Derains, Y., Observations on the I.C.C. Case No. 2138 (1974), (1975) pp. 934, 938Google Scholar; Derains, Y., Chronique des sentences arbitrales, (1981) p. 943.Google Scholar

75. Schwebel, S., International Arbitration: Three Salient Problems (1987) p. 4.Google Scholar

76. See n. 37.

77. See n. 30.

78. See nn. 32 and 33.

79. See supra, section 3.4.

80. See a 40.