Bjorn Gehle wrote a detailed examination of the ACICA Rules. The Arbitration Rules of the Australian Centre for International Commercial. These rules (“Rules”) are the rules of arbitration of the Australian Centre for InternationalCommercial Arbitration. This changed significantly in when ACICA launched its own institutional arbitration rules, known as the ACICA Arbitration Rules (“ACICA Rules” or “Rules ”).
|Published (Last):||24 January 2015|
|PDF File Size:||12.5 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||4.96 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
The key changes are discussed below. Interim measures Under the Model Law, the arbitral tribunal is generally free to make any interim arbitratkon or grant interim relief as it deems necessary.
Respondents had mixed preferences arbitraation the manner in which arbitrator conduct should be regulated. This is consistent with statistics released by arbitral institutions such as SIAC and HKIAC which have indicated a rising use of emergency arbitrators in regional seats.
While more acic indicated that they would prefer domestic courts for seeking urgent relief, 26 per cent of respondents were undecided. In comparison, respondents were more divided as to whether issue conflicts should be regulated in the context of investment treaty arbitrations. Given the competition between the institutions, it would not be surprising to see similar systems emerge in other arbitral institutions in the region.
While the changes are not completely uniform with the rules of other institutions and contain subtle differences in approach, the changes modernise the rules in a way that administers more effective arbitration proceedings where multiple parties, similar disputes or ambiguities may be involved.
The survey noted the continuing popularity of international arbitration with 90 per cent of respondents indicating that it was their preferred dispute resolution mechanism for resolving cross-border disputes.
Asian Dispute Review
The arbitral procedure The principle of party autonomy is held in high regard by Australian tribunals. Once implemented, the TPP will significantly expand the ability of investors in several capital exporting states to take advantage of ISDS mechanisms. Andrea Martignoni Partner, Sydney Ph: While the results of individual evaluations will not be published, it is expected that the new system will encourage a greater sense of accountability among arbitrators who will inevitably be more conscious of their performance.
Such an appeal is only possible with the leave of the court or if the parties agree to the appeal before the end of the appeal period. Arbitration has become equally common in international disputes.
The latest changes by ACICA are valuable reforms that will serve to better meet the needs of those engaged in international trade and commerce. It is noteworthy that 63 per cent of respondents indicated that ‘issue conflicts’, where an arbitrator has previously taken a particular position on an issue to be decided in the case, did not require specific regulation in commercial arbitrations.
Recent changes to the ACICA Arbitration Rules – Lexology
The Model Law and the CAAs do not prescribe time limits for delivery of the award and delays in rendering an award do not result in the termination of the arbitral proceedings. Even though respondents identified the length and cost of international arbitration as its most problematic features, they did not select a clear winner when presented with a list of potential innovations to control those issues.
These included disclosure of the use of third party funding 76 per cent and the identity of the funder 63 per cent to increase transparency and assist with conflicts of interest checks. The survey also analysed the use of emergency arbitrators in the context of reducing time and cost and found that 66 per cent of respondents had no experience with emergency arbitrations.
Although arbitrators enjoy great freedom in the taking of evidence, in practice, arbitrators in international proceedings will often refer to the IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence the IBA Rules.
These amendments ensure that the IAA remains consistent with current international ackca practice and that Australia remains an attractive seat for arbitrations in the region. From an Australian perspective, the opening of foreign markets, especially in Asia, is also increasing the significance of the protection of foreign direct investment under the International Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States the ICSID Convention.
The increasing incidence of emergency arbitration has led to more attention being paid to the issue of enforceability in the context of awards rendered by emergency arbitrators. The new release is therefore a step towards ensuring that ACICA rules continue to reflect contemporary best practice. International Arbitration – Australian courts’ power to grant interim freezing orders. Parties are generally free to tailor the arbitration procedure to their particular needs, provided they comply with fundamental principles of due process and natural justice.
The chapter also includes a modern investor-State dispute settlement ISDS mechanism, which permits investors to enforce these protections through consultation and negotiation, or failing these processes, through binding international arbitration.
Strong and steady growth of the Australian economy over much of the past two decades and the opening of Asian markets have accelerated a growing trend towards the use of arbitration in other areas, particularly the energy and trade sectors.
FTAs with China and Korea also incorporated ISDS provisions including requirements that Australian investors must be treated fairly and equitably, and prohibit discrimination against foreign investments in favour of domestic investments. Chapter 9 of the TPP includes substantive provisions on the protection of investments of nationals of contracting states in the territory of the other contracting states.
The reluctance to use emergency arbitrators appears to revolve around the enforceability of emergency arbitration decisions, which may vary across jurisdictions and may be time-consuming and unpredictable. The IAA now includes detailed provisions dealing with the consolidation of proceedings, which apply if the parties expressly agree to them. Where the parties fail to agree on the number of arbitrators to be appointed, section 10 of the CAAs provides for a single arbitrator to be appointed while article 10 of the Model Law provides for the appointment of a three-member tribunal.
There is no equivalent provision in the Model Law. Australia acceded to the New York Convention without reservation. Court rules and procedures are considered sufficiently robust to protect against potential abuses of process arising from such funding arrangements. If multiparty disputes are likely to arise under a contract, it is advisable to agree on a set of arbitration rules containing particular provisions for the appointment of arbitrators under those circumstances, such as those found under article 13 of the ACICA Rules.
Having said that, a number of interviewees stated that regulation should focus more on disclosure rather than the establishment of a prescriptive, substantive regime. Further, the court must be satisfied that the following requirements are satisfied: The court was assisted in its interpretation by the fact that the agreement also included a jurisdiction clause.
Provided the arbitration agreement is drafted widely enough, Australian courts will stay proceedings in face of a valid arbitration agreement. The parties are free to agree on a procedure for challenging arbitrators.