Herald of Civil Procedure
EN
main-photo

We in a citing index:

Thursday, 9 March 2017

Performance by Courts of Assistance Functions in Respect of Arbitration

L.A. Terehova, 
Doctor of Legal Sciences, Professor, Head of the Department of Civil and Arbitration Procedure 
of the Dostoevsky Omsk State University 

The article discusses causes and consequences of legislation amendments, regulating the activities of arbitration. The absence of state control has resulted in that the institution of arbitration courts discredited itself and cannot be effectively used for solving many business issues, as it is usually done in the world. These changes bringing into being a new procedure for the establishing of arbitral institutions have one common goal: to increase governmental control and to reduce the number of arbitration tribunals. The tightening of requirements for the establishment of arbitration courts, in particular, increasing the time and cost of creating arbitration institutions cuts off unscrupulous parties. This reform is leading to the establishment of control over any arbitration in our country, and it violates the nature of arbitration: its freedom and autonomy from the state. The same goal is, in effect, pursued by the assistance function of courts in respect of arbitration. In the procedure of performance of assistance functions both positive (possibility to rely on the authority of the state court) and negative (length of the proceedings) features may be detected. It is assumed that changes in the direction of government regulation before autonomous sphere in the current legislation will lead to a single result: arbitration courts will be much less, and they will be controlled by the state. 

Keywords: arbitration; arbitration tribunal; assistance function; supervisory functions; appointment of arbitrators; arbitrator.

References 

Belyakova A.V. Mekhanizmy sudebnoi i vnesudebnoi zaschity prava na sudoproizvodstvo v razumnij srok [Mechanisms of Judicial and Non-Judicial Protection of the Right to Trial within a Reasonable Time]. Moscow, 2016. (In Russian) 
Brazhnikov V. Mnogoobrazie v usloviyah ogranichenij [Variety in Conditions of Restrictions]. ezh-Yurist = ezh-Lawyer, 2016, no. 4. (In Russian) 
Gin-Barisyavichene K. Reforma treteiskyh sudov: nyuansy i novshestva [Reform of Arbitration Courts: Nuances and Innovations]. ezh-Urist = ezh-Lawyer, 2016, no. 4. (In Russian) 
Nikolyukin S.V. Mezhdunarodnij kommercheskij arbitrazh kak instrument po uregulirovaniyu ekonomiko-pravovyh sporov v usloviyah innovatsionnogo hozyaistvovaniya [International Commercial Arbitration as a Tool of Settlement of Economic and Legal Disputes in Conditions of Innovative Economy Management]. Arbitrazhnij i grazhdanskij protsess = Arbitration and Civil Procedure, 2016, no. 3. (In Russian) 
Sevastyanov G.V. Pravovaya priroda treteiskogo razbiratelstva kak instituta alternativnogo razresheniya sporov (chastnogo protsessualnogo prava). Vyp. 7 [Legal Nature of Arbitration as an Alternative Dispute Resolution Institution (Private Procedural Law). Issue 7]. Moscow, 2015. (In Russian)

 Information about the author 

Terekhova L.A. (Omsk, Russia) – Doctor of Legal Sciences, Professor, Head of the Department of Civil and Arbitration Procedure of the Dostoevsky Omsk State University (644065, Omsk, 50 let Profsoyuzov st., 100/1; e-mail: jf-omsu@mail.ru).

 el_.png   it_.png   book.png

L.A. Terekhova