Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Concept of Arbitration
Arbitration
A voluntary dispute resolution process in which one or more arbitrators,
appointed in accordance with the agreement of the parties or rules
promulgated pursuant to the ADR Act, resolve a dispute by rendering an
award.
An arrangement for taking and abiding by the judgement of selected persons
in some disputed matter, instead of carrying it to established tribunals of
justice, and is intended to avoid the formalities, the delay, the expense and
vexation of ordinary litigation.
A merit or evidence based form of ADR.
Arbitration vs Mediation
ARBITRATION
It is the arbitrator that decides
the dispute and renders an
arbitral award to conclude
the arbitral proceeding.
MEDIATION
It is the parties themselves who
enter
into
and
execute
a
mediated
settlement
agreement to conclude the
mediation proceeding
II.
Kinds of Arbitration
1. Voluntary
- Involves the reference of a dispute to an impartial body, the
members of which are chosen by the parties themselves, which
parties freely consent in advance to abide by the arbitral award
issued after the proceedings where both parties had the opportunity
to be heard.
- Governed by the ADR act and its IRR.
2. Compulsory
III.
IV.
Policy on Arbitration
In Korea Technologies Co., Ltd. V. Lerma, the Supreme Court had an opportunity to
reiterate the judicial policy on arbitration in the following manner:
Being an inexpensive, speedy and amicable
method of settling dispute, arbitration along with
mediation, conciliation and negotiation is
encouraged by the Supreme Court. Aside from
unclogging judicial docket, arbitration also hastens
the resolution n of disputes, especially of the
commercial kind. It is thus regarded as the wave of
the future in international civil and commercial
disputes. Brushing aside a contractual agreement
calling for arbitration between the parties would be
a step backward.
In Koppel, Inc. v. Makati Rotary Club Foundation, Inc., the Supreme Court went on to
sustain the state policy of encouraging alternative dispute resolution
notwithstanding the harsh legal implications that the policy may create. The
Supreme Court said:
This Court is not unaware of the apparent
harshness of the Decision that it is about to make.
Nonetheless, this Court must make the same if only
to stress the point that, in our jurisdiction, bone fide
arbitration agreements are recognized as valid; and
that laws, rules and regulations do exist protecting
and ensuring their enforcement as a matter of state
policy. Gone should be the days when courts treat
otherwise valid arbitration agreements with disdain
and hostility, if not outright jealous, and then get
away with it. Court should instead learn to treat
alternative means of dispute resolution as effective
partners in the administration of justice and, in the
case of arbitration agreements, to afford them
judicial restraint. Today, this Court only performs its
part in upholding a once disregarded state policy.
3
V.
Objectives of Arbitration
To provide a speedy and inexpensive method of settling disputes by
allowing the parties to a void the formalities, delay, expense, and
aggravation which commonly accompany ordinary litigation, especially
litigation which goes through the hierarchy of courts.
VI.
Arbitrator
Arbitrator vs Arbiter
ARBITRATOR
May use his own discretion in the
performance of his function
VII.
ARBITER
Bound by rules of law and equity
in rendering an award.
Example: Labor Arbiters of the
Arbitration Branch of the NLRC
Arbitration Agreement
(Articles 4.7. to 4.9, IRR)
IX.
In line with the principle that ADR providers and practitioners, including
arbitrators, act in a quasi-judicial capacity, and that they are quasi-judicial
agencies or instrumentalities, the principles of administrative due process
equally apply to arbitral proceedings.
X.
XI.
Joey Elauria