Consolidation of Arbitral Proceedings: A Comparative Study under National and International Arbitration Law

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Associate Professor, Law Department, Faculty of Law and Social Sciences, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran.

2 M. A. in Private Law, Faculty of Law and Social Sciences, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran.

Abstract

Arbitration has become more complex following the spread of this method of resolving commercial and investment disputes, especially with the growth of multi-party disputes, leading to several problems, including parallel and different proceedings. Some legal systems have recognized the consolidation of arbitral proceedings to avoid the issuance of conflicting awards and thus protect the rights of multiple but relevant parties to the arbitration on the one hand, and to increase the efficiency of arbitration by reducing costs and duration of proceeding on the other hand. The consolidation, as the case may be, is contingent on satisfaction of requirements including the consent of the parties, the equality of the arbitration agreement, the uniformity of the parties and the basic legal relationship, the legal authority to issue a judicial order to consolidate, and also its desirability. Nevertheless, disadvantages of the consolidation of arbitration proceedings into the constitution of a new arbitral tribunal, namely prolongation of the proceedings and violation of confidentiality and the principle of party autonomy, have also been considered. This article, while analyzing the above issues, examines other aspects of the consolidation, such as its kinds and position in arbitration laws and regulations, obstacles to the consolidation, the governing law, and the competent authority for consolidation. Considering the lack of a specific provision under Iranian arbitration law, the consolidation of arbitrations can be sufficiently justified by the rule of wisdom and through relying upon the criterion of the combination of related court proceedings.

Keywords

References

  1. الف) فارسی

    1. احمدی، خلیل (1394). مفهوم و آثار عبارات «ارتباط کامل داشتن»، «منوط بودن»، «مربوط بودن» و «هم منشأ بودن» دعاوی در قانون آیین دادرسی مدنی. فصلنامۀ دیدگاه‌های حقوق قضایی، دورۀ 20، ش ۶۹.
    2. حسن‌زاده، مهدی (1394). اثر ارتباط دعاوی در دادرسی مدنی. مجلۀ مطالعات حقوقی دانشگاه شیراز، دورۀ 7، ش ۱.
    3. محسنی، حسن (1385). مفهوم اصول دادرسی و نقش تفسیری آنها و چگونگی تمیز این اصول از تشریفات دادرسی. مجلۀ کانون وکلا، ش 3-192.
    4. هرمزی، خیرالله (1397). جمع و تفکیک بین دعاوی و مقایسۀ آن با تجزیۀ یک دعوا به چند دعوا در حقوق ایران و فرانسه. فصلنامۀ پژوهش حقوق خصوصی، دورۀ 6، ش ۲۳.

     

    ب) انگلیسی

    1. Bermann, George A. (2017). Parallel Litigation and Arbitration. in: George A. Bermann. International Arbitration and Private International Law, Leiden: Brill.
    2. Blackaby, Nigel; Redfern, Alan & Hunter, Martin, (2015). Redfern and Hunter on International Arbitration, 6th ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    3. Born, Gary B. (2020). International Commercial Arbitration, 3rd ed., Netherlands: Kluwer Law International.
    4. Born, Gary B. (2001). International Commercial Arbitration: Commentary and Materials, Netherlands: Kluwer Law International.
    5. Born, Gary & Prasad, Dharshini, (2018). Joinder and Consolidation. Bahrain Chamber for Dispute Resolution International Arbitration Review, Vol. 5, No.1.
    6. Carbonneau, Thomas E. (2014). Law and Practice of Arbitration, 5th ed., New York: Juris.
    7. Cohen, Michael Marks (2009). Overcoming Obstacles to Consolidation of International Arbitrations. in: Rovine, Arthur W. (ed.) Contemporary Issues in International Arbitration and Mediation: The Fordham Papers 2008, Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
    8. Cremades, Bernardo M. & Madalena, Ignacio (2008). Parallel Proceedings in International Arbitration. Arbitration International, Vol. 24, No. 4.
    9. Crivellaro, Antonio (2005). Consolidation of Arbitral and Court Proceedings in Investment Disputes. The Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals, Vol. 4.
    10. Fry, Jason; Greenberg, Simon & Mazza, Francesca (2012). The Secretariat’s Guide to ICC Arbitration: A Practical Commentary on the 2012 ICC Rules of Arbitration from the Secretariat of the ICC International Court of Arbitration, Paris: International Chamber of Commerce (ICC).
    11. Geisinger, Elliott & Ducret, Pierre (2013). Chapter 5: The Arbitral Procedure. in: Geisinger, Elliott & Voser, Nathalie (eds.) International Arbitration in Switzerland: A Handbook for Practitioners, 2nd ed., Netherlands: Kluwer Law International.
    12. Girsberger, Daniel & Voser, Nathalie (2016). International Arbitration: Comparative and Swiss Perspectives, 3rd ed., Netherlands: Kluwer Law International.
    13. Hammond, R G (1989). Aspects for Arbitration: Joinder, Consolidation and Remedies. New Zealand Legal Research Foundation Seminar Papers, Vol. 20, Arbitration law Paper 5.
    14. Hanotiau, Bernard (2020). Complex Arbitrations: Multi-Party, Multi-Contract, Multi-Issue – A Comparative Study, 2nd ed., Netherlands: Kluwer Law International.
    15. Howes, B. Ted & Stowell, Allison M. (2016). The consolidation Dilemma: Is There Finally a Pragmatic Solution?. Dispute Resolution International, Vol. 10, No.1.
    16. Kaufmann-Kohler, Gabrielle; Boisson de Chazournes, Laurence; Bonnin, Victor & Moïse Mbengue, Makane (2006). Consolidation of Proceedings in Investment Arbitration: How Can Multiple Proceedings Arising from the Same or Related Situations Be Handled Efficiently?. Final Report on the Geneva Colloquium held on 22 April 2006, ICSID Review- Foreign Investment Law Journal, Vol. 21, Issue 1.
    17. Lew, Julian David Mathew; Mistelis, Loukas A., et al. (2003). Comparative International Commercial Arbitration, Netherlands: Kluwer Law International.
    18. Manjiao, Chi (2008). “The Fading of compulsory consolidation of Arbitration: A Fight between the Principles of Efficiency and Party Autonomy in International Commercial Arbitration”, Fudan Journal of the Humanities & Social Science, Vol. 4.
    19. Menkel-Meadow, Carrie J.; Porter-Love, Lela; Kupfer-Schneider, Andrea & Moffitt, Michael (2018). Dispute Resolution: Beyond the Adversarial Model, 3rd ed., New York: Wolters Kluwer.
    20. Muchlinski, Peter; Ortino, Federico & Schreuer, Christoph (eds) (2008). The Oxford Handbook of International Investment Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    21. Pair, Lara Michaela (2011). Consolidation in International Commercial Arbitration – the ICC and Swiss Rules, Netherlands: Eleven International Publishing.
    22. Piña, Patricia Izquierdo, “Consolidation of Arbitral Proceedings”, (unpublished manuscript), p. 21, available at: https://camex.com.mx/wp/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/nl35-cont.pdf
    23. Poudret, Jean-François & Besson Sébastien (2007). Comparative Law of International Arbitration, 2nd ed., London: Sweet & Maxwell.
    24. Rowley QC, J William; Bishop, Doak & Kaiser, Gordon E. (2020). The Guide to Energy Arbitrations, 4th ed., London: Law Business Research.
    25. Rubino-Sammartano, Mauro (2014). International Arbitration Law and Practice, 3rd ed., New York: Juris.
    26. Schwartz, Matthew D. (1990). Multiparty Disputes and Consolidated Arbitrations: An Oxymoron or the Solution to A Continuing Dilemma. Case Western Reserve Journal of International law, Vol. 22, Issue 2.
    27. Smith, Gorden (2018). Comparative Analysis of Joinder and Consolidation Provision under Leading Arbitral Rules. Journal of International Arbitration, Vol. 35, Issue 2.
    28. Van Den Berg, Albert Jan (1986). Consolidated Arbitrations and the 1958 New York Arbitration Convention. Arbitration International, Vol. 2, Issue 4, pp. 367-369.
    29. Van Haersolte-van Hof, Jacomijn J. (1997). Consolidation under the English Arbitration Act 1996: A View from the Netherlands. Arbitration International, Vol. 13, Issue4, pp. 427-430.
    30. Whitesell, Anne Marie & Silva-Romero, Eduardo (2003). Multiparty and Multicontract Arbitration; Recent ICC Experience. in: Complex Arbitrations: Perspectives on Their Procedural Implications, 14 Special Supplement, ICC Ct. Bulletin.

     

     

    ج) آرا

    1. Judgment of 7 January 1992, BKMI v. Dutco, 10 ASA Bull. 295, 297 (1992) (French Cour de Cassation Civ. 1), Note, Jarrosson.
    2. Compania Espanola de Petroleos, S.A. v. Nereus Shipping S.A., 527 F. 2nd 966 (2d Cir. 1975).
    3. United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland v. The Boeing Company, 998 F.2d 68 (2nd Cir. 1993).
    4. New England Energy Inc, v. Keystone Shipping Company, 855 F. 2d 1 (1st Cir. 1988).
Comparative Law Review
Volume 13, Issue 2 - Serial Number 26
Autumn & Winter 2022-2023
September 2022
Pages 603-632

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics