Procedure - Chapter 19 - 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.
19.I. AUTONOMY IN THE DETERMINATION OF PROCEDURAL RULES
Modern arbitration laws tend not to prescribe the application of any specific procedural rules regulating the steps to be taken in proceedings. The autonomy of the parties and arbitrators involved when determining the procedural rules is usually only limited by one fundamental requirement, i.e. the principle of due (fair) process.2 A fitting illustration of this principle is Swiss law, specifically Article 182 of the IPRG [CHE]. The first paragraph of the cited regulation establishes the principle of the autonomy of the participants regarding the choice of appropriate procedural rules. The second paragraph lays down the rule that, if the parties do not select their own procedural rules of arbitration, then the arbitrators have the right to establish the procedural rules. The third paragraph of this piece of Swiss legislation provides for the only restriction on the arbitral tribunal’s autonomy, which is due process.