My experience in arbitration

This paper deals with the nature of arbitration as one of the alternatives in dispute resolution processes different from mediation and conciliation, and obviously, from judicial adjudication. Unlike a mediator or a conciliator, an arbitrator is empowered to pass a judgement, like a court. In other... Deskribapen osoa

Egile nagusia: Witz, Claude
Formatua: Artikulua
Hizkuntza: Ingelesa
Argitaratua: Instituto Internacional de Sociología Jurídica de Oñati = The Oñati International Institute for the Sociology of Law 2011
Gaiak:
Sarrera elektronikoa: http://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/oaiart?codigo=3871995
Etiketak: Erantsi etiketa bat
Etiketarik gabe, Izan zaitez lehena erregistro honi etiketa jartzen!
Azalaren irudirik gabe QR Kodea
Gorde:
Laburpena: This paper deals with the nature of arbitration as one of the alternatives in dispute resolution processes different from mediation and conciliation, and obviously, from judicial adjudication. Unlike a mediator or a conciliator, an arbitrator is empowered to pass a judgement, like a court. In other words, the arbitrator will render a decision which is binding for the parties. The arbitrator has the jurisdictio, like a judge. Although the office of a judge and an arbitrator is the same, the source of their power is different. The judge�s power originates from a State, whereas the power of the arbitrator results primarily from a contract. Unlike the court, the arbitrator lacks the imperium, i.e. the power to make the award enforceable. When a party refuses to enforce the award, enforceability can only be provided by the judge or an authority of the state where the award has to be enforced. In a certain sense the state thus provides the back up for the arbitration system. This paper presents personal thoughts drawn from the author�s professional experience as an arbitrator in Franco-German disputes.