(Prunier decision, history).

The relationship between Arbitration and Court Litigation (history, Prunier case) Created by Drahomíra Fridrichová, Šárka Malinovská, Dušan Valent, Jana Vávrová

Introduction origin: lost in obscurity not clear boundaries all ages of recorded history

Ancient times • Middle East • Tulpunnaya v. Killi • King Solomon

• Egypt • arrangements in funerary trusts, 2 500 B.C.

Ancient Greece and Rome  Greece  private and commercial disputes  arbitration = natural process  Greek Courts, lack of clear boundaries

 Rome  compromissum, penalty  Post-Classical period – pacta sunt servanda

From Middle ages… guilds – mandatory arbitration

What would you say, penalty clauses popular or not?

influence of canonical law and Roman law arbitral deeds

...to modern era • worldwide spread of arbitration • fragmentality of arbitration in each country

England  arbitration older than the common law system  1698 Arbitration Act  promoting commerce  BUT limited by courts  Civil Procedure Act (1833)  improvement: arbitration agreements could not be revoked, witnesses under oath  Common Law Procedure Act (1854)  comprehensive arbitration statute  extensive judicial review of the substance of arbitrator’s awards  1889 Arbitration Act  widely adopted throughout the Commonwealth countries

France • Edict of 1560 • use of mandatory arbitration for resolving commercial disputes

• French Revolution • many changes  arbitration as a threat • numerous restrictions

Prunier case, 1843 • validity of an arbitration clause • “clause compromissoire” (in advance of a dispute) v. “compromis” • court´s holding – invalid: the names of the arbitrators not given • grounds for decision – protection of weaker parties (adhesion contract)

Prunier case • mistrust of arbitration • Prunier rule = nullifying all arbitration clauses concluded before the dispute • distinct legal regime of international and internal arbitration

Around Europe Austria-Hungary permanent arbitration panel by Commercial and industrial Chamber 1895 – civil procedure act  responsive to arbitration

Czechoslovakia –this act into national law in 1918

Germany, Belgium, Netherlands open to arbitration (unlike France)

United States • earliest days of European settlement • difficulties resolving disputes

• New Amsterdam (New York) • Dutch settlers: mandatory and consensual arbitration. • different development (world business center)

• colonies • hostility towards arbitration until 1833

• 1925 Federal Arbitration Act • hostility fully overcome in the early 20th century • in force until today

Internation Commercial Arbitration arbitration = rival of national courts → arbitration developed on international level the growth: continental Europe in the 1920s

Geneva Convention & Geneva Protocol Geneva Protocol on Arbitration Clauses (1923) Geneva Convention for the Execution of Foreign Arbitral Awards (1927)

New York Convention (1958) recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards referral by a court to arbitration www.newyorkconvention.org

UNCITRAL Model Law

• United Nations Commission on International Trade Law • • • • •

rules acceptable worldwide great practical value updated information on case law and enactments assistance in law reform projects seminars on uniform commercial law

• zákon č.216/1994 Sb. ze dne 1. listopadu 1994 o rozhodčím řízení a o výkonu rozhodčích nález

Systems of justice • delegated: legitimacy - the state justice system • parallel: separate tracks of business dispute and formal state justice • abandoned: little role of judicial institutions

Today’s reality A) less supportive national legislations ▪ low practical experience ▪ potential to support v. readiness of courts B) supportive  Europe, North America, parts of Asia

Thank You for Your ATTENTION!

Sources 

Bibliography: VÁRADY, Tibor; BÁRCELO, John J.; VON MEHREN, Arthur T. International Commercial Arbitration : A Transnational perspective. 3rd edition. St. Paul : Thomson/West, 2006. 931 s. ISBN 0-314-16062-0. Dezalay, Yves, and Bryant G. Garth : Dealing in Virtue. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996. Ch. 10, pp. 197218. EMERSON, Frank D. History of Arbitration Practice and Law. Clevelant St. Law Review. 1970, 19, s. 155-165. WOLAVER, Earl S. . The Historical Background of Commercial Arbitration. The University of Pennsylvania Law Review. 1934 , 83, 2, s. 132-146 . Dostupný také z WWW: . DE VRIES, Henry P. . International Commercial Arbitration: A Contractual Substitute for National Courts. Tulane Law Review. 1982-1983, 57, s. 42. Settlement of Disputes by Arbitration in Fifteenth-Century England. Law and History Review. 1984 , 2, s. 21-43. Dostupný také z WWW: . JONES, William C. An Inquiry into the History of the Adjudication of Mercantile Disputes in Great Britain and the United States. The University of Chicago Law Review. 1958 , 25, 3, s. 445-464. Dostupný také z WWW: . SOIA, Mentschikoff. Commercial Arbitration. Columbia Law Review. 1961, 61, s. 846-870. ROZEHNALOVÁ, Nadežda. Rozhodčí řízení v medzinárodním a vnitrostátním obchodním styku. 2. Praha : Aspi, Wolter Kluwer, 2008. 388 s. ISBN 978-80-7357-324-9



Online sources: www.uncitral.com; newyorkconvention.com