Effective Date - Chapter 50 - Arbitration Law of Czech Republic: Practice and Procedure
Alexander J. Bělohlávek, Univ. Professor, Dr.iur., Mgr., Dipl. Ing. oec/MB, Dr.h.c. Lawyer admitted and practising in Prague/CZE (Branch N.J./US), Senior Partner of the Law Offices Bělohlávek, Dept. of Law, Faculty of Economics, Ostrava, CZE, Dept. of Int. and European Law, Faculty of Law, Masaryk University, Brno, CZE (visiting), Chairman of the Commission on Arbitration ICC National Committee CZE, Arbitrator in Prague, Vienna, Kiev etc. Member of ASA, DIS, Austrian Arb. Association. The President of the WJA – the World Jurist Association, Washington D.C./USA.
50.I. COMMENTARY ON SECTION 50 OF THE ARBACT
The Amendment to the ArbAct (Act No 19/2012 Coll.) entered into effect on 1 April 2012. As a result of the recodification of civil law, as of 1 January 2014, Section 4(2) and Sections 36 to 39 of the ArbAct will be replaced by provisions of the new Act on Private International Law (PIL).
50.II. CASE LAW
Judgment of the Regional Court in Brno No 44 Co 246/2010 of 27 September 2011:9 [inadmissibility of the retroactive use of case law; good faith of the parties to an arbitration agreement] (1) The findings of the Resolution of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of the Czech Republic No 31 Cdo 1945/2010 of 11 May 2011, concerning the invalidity of arbitration clauses referring to rules issued by an entity other than a permanent arbitral institution, must be accepted in subsequent judicial practice as their purpose is to unify fragmented judicial practice. In view of these conclusions, the arbitration clause agreed on 26 April 2007 should be regarded as invalid. (2) In the present case, however, there are circumstances where the appellate court considers the use of these findings to be inconsistent with Section 3(1) of the CC. It came to light that both parties had accepted the arrangements regarding the arbitration clause, did not doubt its applicability and permissibility, and engaged in acts of law on that basis at a time when such an arrangement was deemed valid by case law.