Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 6

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  arbitrator
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
Arbitration is frequently described as “justice for gentlemen,” which can suggest an absence of procedural issues of such significance to the outcome of the case as in the case of proceedings before common courts. Meanwhile, experience shows that only the types of disputed procedural issues differ slightly in arbitration, while their impact on the outcome is also significant. Of the formal issues, the most important seems to be the status of the arbitrators adjudicating in the case. Given that, in practice, arbitration is of a single instance and has a limited, exhaustively itemized number of premises specified in Article 1206 of the Civil Procedures Code for lodging a complaint to set aside an arbitral award, strict adherence by arbitrators to the principles of impartiality and independence is of fundamental importance. A possible breach of these principles can undermine the confidence of the parties not only in the arbitral panel in a specific case, but also in arbitration in general. Consequently, a possible attempt to remove an arbitrator, as a rule, constituting the manifestation of efforts to eliminate errors made while the arbitral panel was being constituted, is considered only a partial remedium. Therefore, the objective of the study is to analyse the key formal expectations of arbitrators, as well as consider selected issues related to the institution of the removal of an arbitrator - understood as a guarantee of his impartiality and independence. The intention of this analysis is to help define the status of an arbitrator in arbitration proceedings.
EN
Recently, opinions have been voiced in the doctrine of civil procedure that courts of arbitration should observe all provisions of substantive civil law in the same way as state courts of law. This view is incorrect and cannot be derived from the provisions of Part 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure or the provisions of the UNICITRAL Rules of Arbitration of 2010. Further, the very concept of courts of arbitration is that their decisions will be made taking into account mutual contractual obligations of the parties in dispute, the general legal principles, the principle of fairness and equity, and the established custom. What is more, these courts are not bound to follow any provision of substantive law, and must only respect the fundamental principles of the legal order (the public order clause). Thus, if parties are not happy with such a concept of a court of arbitration the should not subject their civil matters to their jurisdiction.
PL
W doktrynie procesu cywilnego pojawiły się opinie, że sądy polubowne (arbitrażowe) muszą przestrzegać wszystkich przepisów prawa cywilnego (prawa materialnego) na takiej samej zasadzie, jak czynią to sądy państwowe. Pogląd ten jest błędny, gdyż nie można go wyprowadzić ani z przepisów części piątej Kodeksu postępowania cywilnego, ani też z postanowień Regulaminu arbitrażowego UNCITRAL z 2010 r. Poza tym sama idea sądów arbitrażowych polega na tym, że orzekają one na podstawie postanowień umowy, ogólnych zasad prawa, zasad słuszności i ustalonych zwyczajów. Nie są natomiast związane prawem materialnym, muszą jedynie respektować podstawowe zasady porządku prawnego (klauzula porządku publicznego). Strony, którym to nie odpowiada, nie powinny zapisywać swoich spraw cywilnych sądom polubownym.
Studia Iuridica
|
2018
|
vol. 75
189-208
PL
The courts of modern countries do not want to use the monopoly in the area of deciding about investments or sports cases. Henceforth, in time appeared a construction of alternative forms for solving such a dispute. They constitute an open category of proceedings solving sports disputes, which are undergoing a big evolution in some countries nowadays. Their common characteristic is the interference of a neutral third party (for example an arbitrator), with a purpose to present or propose to the parties a solution of a dispute. Arbitration is often thought as a quick and efficient method for determining controversies. The modern law prescribes formal and substantive requirements for the arbitration agreement, which must be made in writing. The requirement of a written form is also satisfied if in a contract between parties, they refer to a document containing a clause with a decision to resolve their dispute in arbitration, provided that such a contract is made in writing and the reference incorporates that clause into the contract. The principal problem related to the arbitration agreement “per relationem” or “by reference” lies in the consensual character of such agreement whereas the form of the agreement has been found to be a preliminary question to this matter. In the article the author analyses the institutional basis for obligatory arbitration in past and currently. This type of arbitration may be forced by a law, a third party (e.g. international sports federation) or a party of the legal relationship.
EN
International arbitration as the efficient means of alternative dispute resolution has become, due to globalization, a highly specialised service rendered by professionals. Master’s degree program (LLM) completion enables those interested to become competent and competitive specialists in arbitration on the international arena. Great Britain has accumulated broad practical experience in organizing professional training in the field of international arbitration. Many leading British universities offer prospective students Master’s programs in this speciality, encouraging all comers, even those with the initial non-legal background. Basic competences of LLM graduates in international arbitration (systemic competences, professional instrumental competences, professional social and personal competences) have been identified and clarified on the basis of relevant sources analysis. Professionally important knowledge, abilities and skills have been generalized and explained. For instance, an international arbitration LLM graduate is obliged to possess communicative and social skills, cognitive abilities and skills in the subject area, must be competent in English law, etc.
EN
The article is the first one in a series of two studies analyzing the use of artificial intelligence in the arbitral decision-making process in the light of applicable legal regulations. In terms of the use of AI in arbitral decision-making process, two possibilities can be distinguished: supporting arbitrator by artificial intelligence and replacement of human by artificial intelligence. The paper deals with the first one of these issues. The Polish legal order does not contain provisions that would directly specify the scope of tasks that can be delegated to other persons or technologies. Certain restrictions in this respect are set forth in the provisions on setting aside an arbitral award. Article 1206 § 1 of the Polish Code of Civil Procedure lists among grounds for setting aside an award the circumstances of depriving a party of the possibility of defending his rights in proceedings before an arbitral tribunal and failure to comply with the requirements regarding the composition of the arbitral tribunal or the basic principles of proceedings before that court, arising from the Act or determined by parties (Article 1206 § 1 points 2 and 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure).
XX
Artykuł jest pierwszym z cyklu dwóch opracowań analizujących problematykę wykorzystania sztucznej inteligencji w arbitrażu w procesie podejmowania decyzji merytorycznych w świetle obowiązujących regulacji prawnych. W aspekcie zastosowania AI przy rozstrzyganiu sporu wyodrębnić można dwie możliwości: wsparcie arbitrów przez sztuczną inteligencję przy podejmowaniu decyzji merytorycznych oraz zastąpienie człowieka przez sztuczną inteligencję w roli arbitra. Artykuł podejmuje pierwsze z wymienionych zagadnień. Polski porządek prawny nie zawiera przepisów, które bezpośrednio określałyby zakres zadań, przy wykonywaniu których arbiter może wspierać się pomocą innych osób bądź technologii. Pewne ograniczenia w tym względzie ustanawiają przepisy dotyczące uchylenia wyroku arbitrażowego, które jako podstawy uchylenia wymieniają pozbawienie strony możliwości obrony swoich praw w postępowaniu przed sądem polubownym oraz niezachowanie wymagań co do składu sądu polubownego lub podstawowych zasad postępowania przed tym sądem, wynikających z ustawy lub określonych przez strony (art. 1206 § 1 pkt. 2 i 4 k.p.c.).
PL
Artykuł jest drugim z cyklu dwóch opracowań analizujących problematykę wykorzystania sztucznej inteligencji w arbitrażu w procesie podejmowania decyzji merytorycznych w świetle obowiązujących regulacji prawnych. Artykuł porusza kontrowersyjne zagadnienie możliwości zastąpienia człowieka przez sztuczną inteligencję w roli arbitra. Punktem odniesienia jest polski porządek prawny ujęty w konwencjach międzynarodowych, których Polska jest stroną, oraz zgodnie z Kodeksem postępowania cywilnego, zestawiony z rozwiązaniami funkcjonującymi w wybranych państwach.
EN
The article is the first one in a series of two studies analyzing the use of artificial intelligence in the arbitral decision-making process in the light of applicable legal regulations. It deals with the controversial issue of replacement of human by artificial intelligence. This issue will be analysed from a perspective of Polish legal order, included in international conventions in force in Poland and in the Code of Civil Procedure, juxstaposed with solutions functioning in selected countries.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.