Case Law of Czech Courts on Independence and Impartiality of Arbitrators and on Appointment of Arbitrators - Czech and Central European Yearbook of Arbitration - Independence and Impartiality of Arbitrators - 2014

Author(s):

Alexander J. Bělohlávek

Page Count:

30 pages

Media Description:

1 PDF Download

Published:

February, 2014

PDF229.37 KB

$40.00

Description:

Originally from Czech and Central European Yearbook of Arbitration - 2014: Independence and Impartiality of Arbitrators

Preview Page

1. Judgment of the Regional Court in Olomouc (in

the statement of grounds) No 22 Cm 18/2001-90

of 30 May 2001 (upheld by the Resolution of the

High Court in Olomouc of 10 October 2001)4

Key words:

independence | impartiality | entities other than a permanent arbitral

institution | lists of arbitrators | entry in the list of arbitrators

15.01. A challenge raised on account of doubts about the independent and
impartial decision making of an arbitrator registered in the list of

arbitrators maintained by a private entity other than a permanent

arbitral institution5 is legally meaningless if no other good reason is given

as to why the person in question should not be appointed as arbitrator.

Likewise, the mere inclusion of an arbitrator chosen by the claimant and

the inclusion of the claimant’s legal representative in the same list of

arbitrators in which lawyers from across the Czech Republic are

registered is not a reason to doubt their impartial decision making.

2. Judgment of the Constitutional Court of the

Czech Republic No II. ÚS 105/01 of 3 July 20016

Key words:

requirements for judges | independence | impartiality | person

participating in proceedings | the relationship of economic dependence

15.02. (1) A judge, as a representative of public authority,7 may be (and often

is) a target of unjustified criticism in the media; at the same time,

however, a higher degree of tolerance and perspective than for individual

citizens should be anticipated and demanded. It should also be taken into

account that the principle of independent, impartial and fair decision

making is essential for the functioning of the judiciary, and judges have a

legal, constitutional, and moral duty to observe this principle.

15.03. (2) A judge may be disqualified from hearing and adjudicating on a case

only when it is evident that the judge’s relationship to the case, the

parties, or their representatives is of such a nature and intensity that,

notwithstanding his statutory obligations, he will have neither the ability

nor the capacity to decide independently and impartially. These are

clearly cases where the judge is also on the side of a party or witness or

where his rights could be prejudiced in the proceedings; this equally

applies if the judge has family, friendly, or manifestly hostile relations or a

relationship of economic dependence with the parties to the proceedings.