Registration in the List of Arbitrators - Chapter 35B - 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.
Originally from: Arbitration Law of Czech Republic: Practice and Procedure
35B.I. SECTION 35B(1) OF THE ARBACT
The newly conceived Part Five of the ArbAct (specifically Sections 35a to 35d) requires the MoJ to keep a list of arbitrators who may be designated, by means of an arbitration clause, to hear disputes arising from consumer contracts. Registration in the list is a prerequisite to hold office as an arbitrator in consumer disputes (Section 4(4) of the ArbAct). Persons who meet the statutory requirements for registration may be registered in the list at their own request.
It follows from the provisions of Section 35b of the Act that persons who (•) have full legal capacity, (•) have a clean criminal record, (•) have completed higher education in the field of law, (•) have not been struck off the list of arbitrators in the past five years by a decision of the Ministry, and (•) have paid an administrative fee of CZK 5,000 to the Ministry may be an arbitrator for consumer disputes. These conditions, stemming from Section 35b of the ArbAct, effectively expand the requirements demanded of arbitrators (conditions of eligibility to act as an arbitrator) in consumer disputes. Naturally, the glaring question is to what extent the requirements under Section 35b of the ArbAct, demanded of applicants seeking registration in the list of arbitrators for consumer disputes, are legitimate if such requirements are not expressly mentioned (at least not in full) in Section 4 of the ArbAct. This question is particularly pertinent as regards the requirement of higher education in the field of law.