The Implementations of Law Required for the Executive Issues in the arbitration litigation

Abstract

Abstract

Defining the adjective law that should be applied may have a reflection on the legal specialization in the countries of the location of arbitration and the location of executing the award of arbitration. The reason is that the arbitration award often requires the assistance of the state’s judicial authorities either during the applicability of the arbitration procedures, such as the case of provisional and preventive procedures that have the form of coercion or during the execution of the arbitration along with the required procedures that the arbitration authorities cannot take.

            Along with the usual situation the law that should be applied on the procedures may clash with another law. For example, when the situation necessitates taking one of the arbitror procedures in a third country that is not considered the location country or the country of executing the award. As we know, the will of adversaries has a basic role in organizing proceeding in the procedures; however, this organization lacks the ability to be aware of all of the issues of the procedures. Therefore, in this matter, it should be referred to the law that should be applied on the procedural issues and define its field.

The above hypotheses may show us the importance of defining the field of the law that should be applied on the procedural issues. Arbitration procedures represent the nerve on which the arbitration is established. Through these procedures, the legality and solidness of arbitration in all of its stages is ensured, hence reaching an arbitration award that is liable to be recognized and executed.

This study is important because it reveals the existence of general rules that are common in most of the legal systems in the field of arbitration procedures. They can be considered a core of legislative attempts in the future in order to codify or unite the procedural issues in this field. The extent of the difficulty of differentiating between the procedural and subject matter issued has to be noticed. This differentiation is one of the most important studies in the private international law jurisprudence due to drafting a decisive criterion that separates between what is considered a subject matter issue or a procedural issue. This is so because certain judicial rules may be related to the subject matter or at the same time in a way that makes separating them impossible.

It cannot be said that a law is considered procedural if it does not tackle the subject matter because some procedural laws may tackle the subject matter such as the laws that organize the ways of objecting to the rule.