Make a Submission
Vol. 36 (2016)
General Articles

Enforcement of Emergency Arbitrators' Decisions under Polish Law

PDF
  • Dominik Horodyski,
  • Maria Kierska
Dominik Horodyski
Jagiellonian University of Kraków
Maria Kierska
Jagiellonian University of Kraków

Published 2016-12-31

Keywords

  • civil procedure,
  • commercial arbitration,
  • emergency arbitrator,
  • arbitral tribunal

Copyright (c) 2021 ILS PAS

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

Enforcement of Emergency Arbitrators’ Decisions under Polish Law. (2016). Polish Yearbook of International Law, 36, 231-244. https://doi.org/10.7420/pyil2016k

Abstract

One of the most significant changes in modern arbitration rules is the adoption of emergency arbitrator proceedings. These proceedings were introduced in order to provide a party in need of urgent interim measures before the constitution of an arbitral tribunal with an additional option besides going to state courts. In emergency arbitrator procedures such a party may seize an emergency arbitrator to grant the requested urgent relief. This article provides the Polish perspective on the effectiveness of emergency arbitrator proceedings, given that the Polish law is silent on the institution of emergency arbitrator and the possible recognition and enforcement of the decisions of an emergency arbitrator. The article analyses the Polish regulations on interim measures, together with their enforcement, by comparing the relationship, similarities and divergences between an arbitral tribunal, a state court, and an emergency arbitrator. This brings us to the conclusion that the existing legal framework as to the enforcement of interim measures issued by an arbitral tribunal provides a solid foundation for drawing an analogy to the recognition and enforcement of such orders granted by an emergency arbitrator. Thus, the provisions on enforcement of arbitral tribunal’s orders per analogiam allow for the recognition and enforcement of emergency arbitrators’ decisions on interim measures in Poland.

PDF

References

  1. Asłanowicz M., Arbiter doraźny [Emergency arbitrator], „Przegląd Ustawodawstwa Gospodarczego” 2013, no. 8, pp. 18-22.
  2. Bose R., Meredith I., Emergency Arbitration Procedure: A Comparative Analysis, „International Arbitration Law Review” 2012, vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 186-194.
  3. Brown Ch., The Enforcement of Interim Measures Ordered by Tribunals and Emergency Arbitrators in International Arbitration [in:] A.J. van den Berg (ed.), International Arbitration: The Coming of a New Age?, ICCA Congress Series No. 17, Singapore 2013.
  4. Burova Y., Interim Relief Against the Host State: Analysis of Emergency Awards against Moldova, CIS Arbitration Forum, 28/07/2016, http://www.cisarbitration.com/2016/07/28/interim-reliefagainst-the-host-state-analysis-of-emergency-awards-against-moldova/ [accessed: 30.05.2017].
  5. Caher C., McMillan J., Emergency Arbitration: The Default Option for Pre-Arbitral Relief? [in:] The International Comparative Legal Guide to: International Arbitration 2015 (12th ed.), Global Legal Group, London 2015.
  6. Ereciński T., Postępowania o stwierdzenie wykonalności zagranicznego wyroku arbitrażowego (zagadnienia wybrane) [Proceedings towards the declaration of enforceability of a foreign arbitration award (selected issues)], „Kwartalnik ADR Arbitraż i Mediacja” 2009, no. 1.
  7. Ereciński T., Weitz K., Sąd arbitrażowy [Court of Arbitration], LexisNexis, Warszawa 2008.
  8. Fry J., Greenberg S., Mazza F., The Secretariat’s Guide to ICC Arbitration, ICC Publication 729, Paris 2012.
  9. Głodowski W., Zabezpieczenie roszczeń dochodzonych przed sądem polubownym [Securng claims lodged before the arbitral tribunal], „Kwartalnik ADR Arbitraż i Mediacja” 2009, no. 1, pp. 97-113.
  10. Grando M., The Coming of Age of Interim Relief in International Arbitration: A Report from the 28th Annual ITA Workshop, Kluwer Arbitration Blog, 20/07/2016, http://kluwerarbitrationblog.com/2016/07/20/the-coming-ofage-of-interim-relief-in-international-arbitration-a-report-from-the-28th-annual-ita-workshop/ [accessed: 30.05.2017].
  11. Horodyski D., Kierska M., Concurrent jurisdiction and its consequences in context of enforcement of interim measures of protection in arbitral proceedings, „Kwartalnik ADR Arbitraż i Mediacja” 2016, no. 3.
  12. Horodyski D., Kierska M., Enforcement of emergency arbitrator’s decisions – legal problems and global trends, „Kwartalnik ADR Arbitraż i Mediacja” 2016, no. 1(33).
  13. Horodyski D., Kierska M., Przesłanki orzekania o środkach zabezpieczających w arbirażu handlowym [Prerequisites conditioning the security measures in commercial arbitration], „Przegląd Prawa Handlowego” 2016, no. 3.
  14. International Arbitration Survey: Improvements and Innovations in International Arbitration, http://www.whitecase.com/sites/whitecase/files/files/download/publications/qmul-international-arbitration-survey-2015.pdf [accessed: 30.05.2017].
  15. Jakubecki A., Komentarz aktualizowany do Art. 730(1) Kodeksu postępowania cywilnego [Updated Commentary to article 730(1) of the Code of Civil procedurę] [in:] A. Jakubecki (ed.), Komentarz aktualizowany do ustawy z dnia 17 listopada 1964 r. Kodeks postępowania cywilnego (LEX/el.: 2016).
  16. Kodeks postępowania cywilnego [The Code of Civil Procedure: CCP], Offcial Journal (Dz.U.) 2016, No. 1822 as amended, http://isap.sejm.gov.pl/DetailsServlet?id=WDU19640430296 [accessed: 30.05.2017].
  17. Łaszczuk M., Szpara J., Postępowanie postarbitrażowe [Post arbitrary proceedings] [in:] A. Szumański (ed.), System Prawa Handlowego, Arbitraż Handlowy Tom 8, CH Beck, Warszawa 2010.
  18. Lundstedt J., SCC Practice: Emergency Arbitrator Decisions, Arbitration Institution of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce, Stockholm 2013.
  19. Santacroce F.G., The emergency arbitrator: a full-fledged arbitrator rendering an enforceable decision?, „Arbitration International” 2015, vol. 31, no. 2.
  20. Scherer M., The New Emergency Arbitrator Provisions and Other Options for Urgent Relief Under the 2014 LCIA Rules, „European International Arbitration Review” 2015, no. 1.
  21. Schütze R., Institutional Arbitration: Article-by-Article Commentary, Beck, Munchen 2013.
  22. Sidor A., Dąbrowska K., Zabezpieczenie wykonalności wyroku sądu polubownego w kontekście nowego regulaminu Sądu Arbitrażowego Lewiatan [Securing the enforceability of an arbitration award in the context of the new rules of the Lewiatan Court of Arbitration], „e-Przegląd Arbitrażowy” 2012, no. 3-4.
  23. The UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration of 1985 (original version), http://www.uncitral.org/pdf/english/texts/arbitration/ml-arb/06-54671_Ebook.pdf [accessed: 30.05.2017].
  24. Welser I., Fast Track Proceedings, Expedited Procedure and Emergency Arbitrator – Pros and Cons [in:] B. Gessel-Kalinowska vel Kalisz (ed.), The Challenges and the Future of Commercial and Investment Arbitration, Court of Arbitration Lewiatan, Warszawa 2015.
  25. Wiśniewski W., Hauser-Morel M., Postępowanie zabezpieczające [Securing procedures] [in:] A. Szumański (ed.), System Prawa Handlowego, Arbitraż Handlowy Tom 8, CH Beck, Warszawa 2010.
  26. Wyrok Sądu Najwyższego [judgment of the Supreme Court), 30 September 2010, I CSK 342/10, unpublished.
  27. Wyrok Sądu Najwyższego [judgment of the Supreme Court], 9 September 2010, I CSK 535/09, „Rzeczpospolita”, PCD 2010/214/2.
  28. Yesilirmak A., Provisional Measures [in:] J.D.M. Lew, L.A. Mistelis (eds.), Pervasive Problems in International Arbitration, Kluwer Law International, New York 2006.
  29. Zieliński A., Komentarz do art. 1181 Kodeksu postępowania cywilnego [Commentary to article 1181 of the Code of Civil procedurę] [in:] A. Zieliński (ed.), Kodeks Postępowania Cywilnego Komentarz, CH Beck, Warszawa 2016.

Similar Articles

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.