International arbitration is a very tricky area, there are too many peculiarities so that even an academic course in this field is only a small amount of knowledge that the practitioner should have. We are often asked by young lawyers starting their practice in arbitration about the general information that could help them to have a general picture of what is arbitration.
Dear arbitration practitioners, be precise in specifying the name of an arbitral institution in a contract
With this post we continue the Ukraine – arbitration-friendly jurisdiction set of comments. In our previous posts we already warned arbitration practitioners, attorneys and solicitors who are dealing with drafting arbitration agreements so that they should be precise in specifying the name of an arbitral institution in a contract if the dispute somehow is connected to the Ukrainian jurisdiction. The reason why is that Ukrainian state courts are not trained in favor of arbitration and in many cases do not consider seriously the doctrine of competence-competence in international commercial arbitration.
On October 13, 2010 the Supreme Court of Ukraine ruled in case upon the petition of VKT ARDO LLC against the award of the International Commercial Arbitration Court at the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Ukraine issued in favor of Аrсеlоrmittal Аmbalaj Сеligі Sanауі ve Тісаrеt Аnоnіm Sіrkеtі against VKT ARDO LLC for app. USD 3 mln. Since I have no interest in that case I believe that I can share my opinion.
Recently the arbitration court at the public association “Ukrainian arbitration union” (Odessa) issued an award. That award was adopted after the hearings which were held by means of telecommunication. The participants presented their position to the arbitration court in video conference. The award was announced to the parties through a web-cam as well. Later on the award was signed as a written document and forwarded to the parties. This event became a ground for discussion in Ukrainian specialized mass media. Some of my colleagues treated that event as a step to implementation and propagation of the Internet-arbitration concept. Though I welcome that progressive practice I am far from believing that e-arbitration is limited to or its main feature consists of the possibility of web-hearings. Electronic form arbitration clause (agreement), e-claim, admissibility of electronic evidences, turnover of electronic documents during the process and enforceability of an electronic award, - that is an inexhaustive list of main issues related to the e-arbitration concept. If the reader is interested in that matter I would recommend to familiarize with the document “International commercial arbitration. 5.9. Electronic arbitration” prepared under the auspices of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD).