Публикация посвящена вопросам, связанным с признанием и принудительным исполнением арбитражных решений, в частности, решений международного (иностранного) арбитража, государственным судом. Настоящая публикация особенно интересна тем, что в ней содержится широкий обзор судебной практики.
In a recent case before the Nicosia District Court(1) the applicant sought recognition and enforcement of a decision handed down by the International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce on January 31 2013.
At the application hearing, the court mentioned that an overview of the procedure for the registration and enforcement of arbitral awards and decisions of the International Court of Arbitration can be found inBank fur Arbeit Wirtschaft AG.(2)
Arbitration is an alternative procedure for resolving various disputes. Reasons why the institution of arbitration has flourished and become more established include:
- the length of trials within the state justice framework;
- the use of time-consuming court measures that increase delays;
- the familiarity of arbitrators with their subject matter; and
- the inflexibility of regular justice.
In domestic law, this procedure, as well as the general rules that govern arbitration, are enacted under specific legislation – namely, Chapter 4 of the Arbitration Law.
The frequent and successful use of arbitration on a global scale led the United Nations to enact a comprehensive arbitration code – the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration – for the sake of consistency and uniformity. Thus, an appeal for annulment of an international arbitration decision can be made only under the provisions contained in Article 34 of the model law. Russell on Arbitration(3) states that «of all articles, this mostly clearly illustrates the tensions between international arbitration and the national courts. Article 5 [of the model law] tries to limit court intervention to specific instances».
The court went on to mention a British Columbia Court of Appeal case, Quintette Coal Ltd v Nippon Steel Corporation, in which it was stated that the need for restraint was enhanced during review of arbitral decisions by state courts.
The court then proceeded to mention another related Cypriot case within the same framework,Koullourou v Coop Athiainou,(4) in which it was stated that arbitration does not amount to a precursor for appeal at court, but rather to an independent procedure with its own procedural and proof rules that are proportionate to those of court proceedings, and the arbitrator exercises judicial authority.
After outlining these principles, the court stated that the above authorities determine the philosophy, spirit, level and manner of approach which the courts should apply when dealing with the identification, registration and execution of arbitration decisions, and also with decisions of international arbitration courts.
Автор: George Z Georgiou, George Z Georgiou & Associates LLC