The contribution of the Prague rules to promoting efficiency in international arbitration
The Prague Rules are intended to provide efficiency and reduce costs in conducting arbitration proceedings. The Rules are based on the position that the practice and procedure of international arbitration is too heavily influenced by the adversarial system found in common law jurisdictions, an...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2020
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/oaiart?codigo=7882636 |
| Source: | THEMIS: Revista de Derecho, ISSN 1810-9934, Nº. 77, 2020 (Ejemplar dedicado a: Arbitraje), pags. 367-377 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags: Be the first to tag this record
|
| Summary: |
The Prague Rules are intended to provide
efficiency and reduce costs in conducting
arbitration proceedings. The Rules are based on
the position that the practice and procedure of
international arbitration is too heavily influenced
by the adversarial system found in common law
jurisdictions, and that the inquisitorial judicial
practices of civil law jurisdictions are more
conducive to a “streamlined procedure”.
In this paper, the authors first consider whether
this predicate is accurate and fair. Are adversarial
practices the source of inefficiency in international
arbitration, or can the reasons be found elsewhere?
Next, they compare certain features of the Prague
Rules to the IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence,
and examine how both sets of rules differ in
substance. Moreover, they address the criticisms
that the Prague Rules may pose yet another
case of useless rule-making. In fact, the authors
critically assess the consequences of an active role
of arbitral tribunals in case management and the
appropriateness of a controlled use of documentary
production, witness evidence (particularly in oral
testimony) and appointment of experts. |
|---|