The relationship between Arbitration and Court Litigation (history, Prunier case )

1. The relationship between Arbitration and Court Litigation (history, Pruniercase) Created by Drahomíra Fridrichová, ŠárkaMalinovská, Dušan Valent, Jana Vávrová

3. Introduction • origin: lost in obscurity • not clear boundaries • all ages of recordedhistory

5. Ancient times • Middle East • Tulpunnaya v. Killi • King Solomon • Egypt • arrangements in funerary trusts, 2 500 B.C.

7. Ancient Greece and Rome • Greece • private and commercial disputes • arbitration = natural process • Greek Courts, lack of clear boundaries • Rome • compromissum, penalty • Post-Classical period – pacta sunt servanda

8. From Middle ages… What would you say,popular or not? • guilds – mandatory arbitration • penalty clauses • influence of canonical law and Roman law • arbitral deeds FLOURISHING !!

9. ...to modern era • worldwide spread of arbitration • fragmentality of arbitration in each country

10. England • arbitration older than the common law system • 1698 Arbitration Act • promoting commerce • BUT limited by courts • Civil Procedure Act (1833) • improvement: arbitration agreements could not be revoked, witnesses under oath • Common Law Procedure Act (1854) • comprehensive arbitration statute • extensive judicial review of the substance of arbitrator’s awards • 1889 Arbitration Act • widely adopted throughout the Commonwealth countries

11. France • Edict of 1560 • use of mandatory arbitration for resolving commercial disputes • French Revolution • many changes  arbitration as a threat • numerous restrictions

12. Prunier case, 1843 • validity of an arbitration clause • “clause compromissoire” (in advance of a dispute) v. “compromis” • court´s holding – invalid: the names of the arbitrators not given • grounds for decision – protection of weaker parties (adhesion contract)

13. Prunier case • mistrust of arbitration • Prunier rule • = nullifying all arbitration clauses concluded before the dispute • distinct legal regime of international and internal arbitration

14. Around Europe • Austria-Hungary • permanent arbitration panel by Commercial and industrial Chamber • 1895 – civil procedure act • responsive to arbitration • Czechoslovakia –this act into national law in 1918 • Germany, Belgium, Netherlands • open to arbitration (unlike France)

15. United States • earliest days of European settlement • difficulties resolving disputes • New Amsterdam (New York) • Dutch settlers: mandatory and consensual arbitration. • different development (world business center) • colonies • hostility towards arbitration until 1833 • 1925 Federal Arbitration Act • hostility fully overcome in the early 20th century • in force until today

17. Internation Commercial Arbitration • arbitration = rival of national courts → arbitration developed on international level • the growth: continental Europe in the 1920s

18. GenevaConvention & Geneva Protocol • Geneva Protocol on Arbitration Clauses (1923) • Geneva Convention for the Execution of Foreign Arbitral Awards (1927)

19. New York Convention (1958) • recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards • referral by a court toarbitration • www.newyorkconvention.org

20. UNCITRAL Model Law • United Nations Commission on International Trade Law • rules acceptable worldwide • great practical value • updated information on case law and enactments • assistance in law reform projects • seminars on uniform commercial law • zákon č.216/1994 Sb.zedne 1. listopadu 1994 orozhodčímřízení a o výkonurozhodčíchnález

21. Systems of justice • delegated: legitimacy - the state justice system • parallel: separate tracks of business dispute and formal state justice • abandoned: little role of judicial institutions

22. Today’s reality A) less supportive national legislations ▪ low practical experience ▪ potential to support v. readiness of courts B) supportive • Europe, North America, parts of Asia

23. Thank You for Your ATTENTION!

24. Sources • Bibliography: VÁRADY, Tibor; BÁRCELO, John J.; VON MEHREN, Arthur T. InternationalCommercialArbitration : A Transnationalperspective. 3rd edition. St. Paul : Thomson/West, 2006. 931 s. ISBN 0-314-16062-0. Dezalay, Yves, and Bryant G. Garth :Dealing in Virtue. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996. Ch. 10, pp. 197-218. EMERSON, Frank D. History of Arbitration Practice and Law. Clevelant St. Law Review. 1970, 19, s. 155-165. WOLAVER, Earl S. . The Historical Background of Commercial Arbitration. The University of Pennsylvania Law Review. 1934 , 83, 2, s. 132-146 . Dostupnýtaké z WWW: <http://www.jstor.org/stable/3308189?seq=3>. DE VRIES, Henry P. . InternationalCommercialArbitration: A Contractual Substitute forNationalCourts. TulaneLawReview. 1982-1983, 57, s. 42. Settlement of Disputes by Arbitration in Fifteenth-Century England. Law and History Review. 1984 , 2, s. 21-43. Dostupnýtaké z WWW: <http://www.jstor.org/stable/743909>. JONES, William C. An Inquiry into the History of the Adjudication of Mercantile Disputes in Great Britain and the United States. The University of Chicago Law Review. 1958 , 25, 3, s. 445-464. Dostupnýtaké z WWW: <http://www.jstor.org/stable/1598356>. SOIA, Mentschikoff. CommercialArbitration. Columbia LawReview. 1961, 61, s. 846-870. ROZEHNALOVÁ, Nadežda. Rozhodčířízení v medzinárodním a vnitrostátnímobchodnímstyku. 2. Praha : Aspi, WolterKluwer, 2008. 388 s. ISBN 978-80-7357-324-9 • Online sources: www.uncitral.com; newyorkconvention.com