German Institute of Arbitration (DIS) - Chapter 6 - Performance as a Remedy: Non-Monetary Relief in International Arbitration: ASA Special Series No. 30
Jens Bredow is Rechtsanwalt (Cologne, Germany) and Secretary General of the German Institution of Arbitration (Deutsche Institution für Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit e.V. (DIS)). Mr. Bredow regularly sits as arbitrator in, among others, ICC, VIAC, SCC and ad hoc arbitration proceedings. He has been a member of the commission revising the German arbitration law and serves as an adviser to the German Federal Ministry of Justice, participating in UNCITRAL’s Working Party II (Arbitration and Conciliation). He is a member of the ICC Commission on International Commercial Arbitration and a member of the Drafting Group of the Incoterms 2010 and the ICC Panel of Incoterms Experts of the ICC Commission on Commercial Practice. Mr. Bredow lectures (international) commercial arbitration at the University of Bonn and is author of numerous arbitration related articles and co-editor of DIS-Series (Schriftenreihe der Deutschen Institution für Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit e.V.) dedicated to ADR related topics.
Originally from Performance as a Remedy: Non-Monetary Relief in International Arbitration: ASA Special Series No. 30
The DIS Arbitration Rules do not restrict the right of parties to file motions for relief other than the payment of money. In practice, parties make use of the full spectrum of motions.
In 2007, of the 187 substantive motions filed in 100 DIS proceedings, only 82 were purely claims for payment. The remaining 105 motions were:
• declaratory motions (76),
• requests for information in preparation of a claim for payment (12),
• requests for performance other than in money (13) or requests for orders to cease and desist a specific action (4).
The cases falling under the latter category -- i.e., requests for performance other than in money -- are very varied. They include requests to return movable goods or securities (e.g., bonds). In one case, a motion was filed requesting that the respondent be ordered to publish a letter rectifying a false/misleading statement made by him. In the arbitral award on agreed terms, the respondent undertook to include a link on his website with the relevant correct information. The above-mentioned cases as a rule do not show any special procedural or legal peculiarities.