Main Article Content

Authors

Despite its recognition in different jurisdictions, the application of the iura novit curia principle in international commercial arbitration has been subject to debate. From the most liberal point of view, the principle is entirely applicable to international commercial arbitration in the same way that it would be applied by a judge when rendering a decision under his national law. However, from the most conservative standpoint, any manifestation of this principle allowing arbitrators to take the initiative in raising new legal issues during the proceedings must be completely rejected. Taking as a premise that, generally speaking, members of an international arbitral tribunal are not familiar with the law applicable to the disputes that are brought to them and that they have no experience or practical knowledge regarding such law, the application of the iura novit curia principle in its purest form would not be adequate in the context of international commercial arbitration given its contractual nature and the interests involved. On the other hand, an outright rejection of this principle in international commercial arbitration would tie the hands of arbitrators and create the risk of awards being rendered that either ignore or contradict rules or principles that form part of the applicable law, which could lead to challenges to their validity or later enforcement. For this reason, in order for iura novit curia to be applied in the context of international commercial arbitration, an intermediate approach should be adopted. This involves a significant adaptation of the principle, so that some of its manifestations could be accepted in exceptional circumstances as a tool that arbitrators could use in order to fully comply with duties that are inherent to their decision-making function, including the duty not to exceed the jurisdiction conferred upon them by the parties, the duty to render awards that are valid, enforceable and in accordance with the applicable law, the duty to act in an impartial manner and the duty to guarantee at all times fundamental due process rights of the parties, such as the right to adequately and timely exercise their defense and the right to equality.

Nigel Blackaby, American University Washington College of Law

LL.B., University of Exeter; Diplomado en Derecho Privado Francés, Université d’Aix-Marseille. Socio del grupo de arbitraje internacional de Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer USLLP, Washington, y profesor adjunto de Arbitraje Internacional, American University Washington College of Law, Washington D.C.

Ricardo Chirinos, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer US LLP

Abogado, Universidad Católica Andrés Bello; LL.M. Columbia Law School. Asociado delgrupo de Arbitraje Internacional de Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer US LLP, Washington.
Blackaby, N., & Chirinos, R. (2014). The Application of the lura Novit Curia Principle in International Commercial Arbitration. ACDI - Anuario Colombiano De Derecho Internacional, 6, 77–93. Retrieved from https://revistas.urosario.edu.co/index.php/acdi/article/view/2962

Blackaby, N., Partasides, C. con Redfern, A. y Hunter, M., Redfern and Hunter on International Arbitration, 5a ed., Oxford University Press, Nueva York, 2009.

Born, G. International Commercial Arbitration, Kluwer Law International, Alphen aan den Rijn, 2009 (Vol. I).

Derains, Y., “Observations – Cour d’appel de Paris (1re Ch. C), 13 de noviembre de 1997, Lemeur v. sarl Les Cités invisibles”, Revue de l’Arbitrage, 1998 (Kluwer Law International, n.° 4).

Kaufmann-Kohler, G., “The Arbitrator and the Law: Does He/She Know it? Apply it? How? And a Few More Questions”, en Arbitration

International (Vol. 21), 2005, p. 631.

Paradell, L. y Newcombe, L., Law and Practice of Investment Treaties: Standards of Treatment, Kluwer Law International, Alphen aan den Rijn, 2009.

Sass, S., “Foreign Law in Civil Litigation: A Comparative Survey”, en American Journal of Comparative Law (Vol. 16), 1968, p. 332.

Spagnolo, L., “Iura Novit Curia and the cisg: Resolution of the Faux Procedural Black Hole”, en Towards Uniformity: the 2nd Annual maa Schlechtriem cisg Conference, 2011.

Klöckner c. Camerún, Caso ciadi n.° arb/81/2, Decisión sobre Anulación, 3 de mayo de 1985.

Louis Dreyfus S.A.S. c. Holding Tusculum B.V., 8 de diciembre de 2008, 2008 qccs 5903, disponible en http://www.mcgill.ca/arbitration/othercases/, consultado por última vez el 29 de agosto de 2013.

OAO Northern Shipping Company c. Remolcaderos de Marín SL, 15 de junio de 2007, [2007] ewhc 1821 (Comm).

Convención sobre el Reconocimiento y la Ejecución de las Sentencias Arbitrales Extranjeras, Nueva York, 1958.

ICC Bulletin (Vol. 21).

International Law Association, Resolución n.° 6/2008, 21 de agosto de 2008.

Ley Modelo de la cnudmi sobre Arbitraje Comercial Internacional, 1985 (con las enmiendas aprobadas en 2006).

Reglamento de Arbitraje del Centro de Arbitraje Internacional de Singapur, 2013.

Reglamento de Arbitraje de la Cámara de Comercio Internacional, 2012.

Reglamento de Arbitraje de la Comisión de Arbitraje Económico y Comercial de China, 2012.

Reglamento de Arbitraje del Instituto de Arbitraje de la Cámara de Comercio de Estocolmo, 2010.

Reglamento de Arbitraje de la Organización Mundial de la Propiedad Intelectual, 2002.

Reglas de Arbitraje de la Corte de Arbitraje Internacional de Londres, 1998.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Similar Articles

<< < 10 11 12 13 

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