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.
16.I. SECTION 16 OF THE ARBACT Section 16 of the ArbAct mirrors, by analogy, Section 106(2) of the CCP, which provides that, if judicial proceedings are instituted despite the existence of a valid arbitration agreement and proceedings are terminated on the basis of an objection raised by the respondent as part of its first act on the merits in the case, the original application retains its legal effect provided that the application for the initiation of the proceedings is submitted to arbitration no later than 30 days as of service of the court’s resolution terminating the proceedings. Conversely, the effects of a request for arbitration (statement of claim) submitted to arbitrators (a permanent arbitral institution) in accordance with Section 14 of the ArbAct who decide that, under Section 15 of the ArbAct, they lack authority (jurisdiction) are preserved if an application is again brought before a court or other competent authority within 30 days of service of the resolution ruling on lack of authority (jurisdiction) of the arbitrators or permanent arbitration institution.