This article examines the concept of state liability for non-compliance with the obligation to refer the parties to arbitration pursuant to Article II.3 of the 1958 New York Convention. Article II.3 of the New York Convention obligates the courts of contracting states to safeguard the party against whom legal proceedings have been initiated in violation of a valid international arbitration agreement. The author argues that when the court of a given contracting state decides not to refer the parties to arbitration, particularly, in those cases involving the application of foreign law, and in which an error of judgment has been made (ie misapplication, misinterpretation, or lack of application of the law governing the agreement to arbitrate), the injured party should be entitled to make a claim for damages against the relevant contracting state for breach of a New York Convention right, ie the right to arbitrate.

No abstract

When the claimant serves on the defendant a notice in connection with the initiation of arbitral proceedings pursuant to an arbitration agreement, there is a legitimate expectation that both parties will actively participate in those proceedings and forcefully argue against one another in order to persuade the arbitral tribunal of the merits of the case in question. This expectation is generally met. However, there are cases in which the respondent decides not to take part in the proceedings, with the result that the arbitral tribunal is left with no option but to proceed on an ex parte basis. These types of cases have received relatively scant attention within the international arbitration literature. Nonetheless, the problem of default proceedings remains a matter of practical importance. This article is intended to fill this gap. It provides a practical insight into the arbitral tribunal’s powers in these kinds of proceedings (whether ad hoc or institutional), particularly, in the context of an international arbitration seated in London

En el arbitraje comercial internacional, las audiencias permiten que el tribunal arbitral oiga los argumentos a partir de los cuales cada una de las partes intenta justificar su pretensión, la cual podría tener un carácter principal o incidental. Las audiencias podrían servir, además, para evacuar testigos y expertos. Ni la Ley Modelo de la Comisión de las Naciones Unidas para el Derecho Mercantil Internacional (CNUDMI) ni el Reglamento de Arbitraje de la CNUDMI se refieren expresamente al derecho a una audiencia, de manera que, de lege lata, no existe dicho derecho. Así que la decisión vinculada con la posibilidad de celebrar una audiencia pertenece, por excelencia, a las partes o, según el caso, al tribunal arbitral. Con la llegada del COVID-19, la comunidad arbitral ha hecho énfasis en la sustitución de audiencias presenciales por audiencias virtuales. Empero, el tema de si tales audiencias son o no necesarias permanece inexplorado. El presente artículo examina la idea de los procedimientos arbitrales sin audiencias.

No abstract