Lack of Bias - Chapter 8 - 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.
8.I. SECTION 8(1) OF THE ARBACT
8.I.1. Basic substantive rules for the assessment of lack of bias on the part of the arbitrator and correlation with the mechanisms of protection of the parties under the ArbAct
Although, in most cases, arbitrators are appointed by a party (parties), they do not act as a representative of that party, unlike other forms of alternative dispute resolution in which, in contrast to arbitration, there is no discovery procedure. Instead, an agreement between the parties is mediated. This is typical in cases of mediation, mini-trials, etc. In these other alternative dispute resolution (“ADR”)2 methods, the mediator may well express his legal opinion, but it is not usually binding on the parties, and such statements of opinion do not constitute binding decisions for the parties. In contrast, in arbitration the arbitrator must always act as a person with no vested interest in the course and outcome of the dispute.3 Instead, his connection with the party who appointed him is reflected in the fact that, on behalf of that party, he ensures compliance with procedural rules, and as such is a notional guarantor of the observance of the procedural rights of the party who appointed him.