Principles Of Arbitration

1099 Words5 Pages
First we need to know as what arbitration means, provisions of the year 1996 portrays that it is a procedural law. “It is a procedure in which a dispute is submitted by agreement of the parties, to one or more arbitrators who make a binding decision on the parties of dispute. In choosing arbitration the parties opt for a private dispute resolution procedure instead of going to a court.” There are two important things necessary for Arbitration- Consent and Agreement: If there is an agreement, only then the court can intervene. Consent merely means parties agreeing with the terms and conditions of the Contract. Award is binding on both the parties. It includes Industrial Disputes must be submitted to arbitration. The arbitrator can take no…show more content…
This basic principle of arbitration is known as party autonomy. According to one of the classical books in international arbitration – “Party autonomy is the guiding principle in determining the procedure to be followed in an international commercial arbitration. It is a principle that has been endorsed not only in national laws, but by international arbitration institutions and organizations. The legislative history of the Model Law shows that the principle was adopted without opposition…”- Meaning of Party Obligation: Party Obligation means legal duties and obligations of the parties in arbitration. Party Obligation is also known as mandatory rules for parties which they have to follow before, during and after the arbitration. Parties are free to choose the ways for settling their disputes but the dispute resolution also needs to be prescribed by the law and the process should under the rules given in model law in case of international arbitration and the Indian arbitration and conciliation act 1996 in case of Indian (domestic )…show more content…
There is a great similarity between these two provisions. Another feature of this article is that it has been included in the list of the non-territorial provisions of art.1(2) . That is to say a party can even rely on art.8 when lex loci is in a different state, with the only connection to the adopting state being perhaps that the court action was brought there. Article II(3) reads ‘The court of a contracting state , when seized of an action in a matter in respect of which the parties have made an agreement within the meaning of this article , at the request of one of the parties, refer the parties to arbitration , unless it finds that the said agreement is null and void, inoperative or incapable of being performed’. This article can be seen as on one of the pillars of the model law and no instrument of law that supports arbitration can be envisaged without a similar provision. The safeguard from the national court system is still a necessity and it can be said that article 8 and for the same reason article II(3) of the New York convention upon which it was based – fulfills this purpose perfectly. This is also reflected in the provision’s high adoption
Open Document