Ustavna procesna jamstva v arbitražnih postopkih

Škof, Anja (author), Kramberger Škerl, Jerca (mentor)

Temeljna procesna jamstva kot so pravica do sodišča, pravica do neodvisnega, nepristranskega in zakonitega sodnika, pravica do javnega sojenja in pravica do sojenja v razumnem roku, so na ustavnem in mednarodnem nivoju zagotovljene garancije, ki posameznikom omogočajo procesno varstvo nasproti državnim organom. Arbitraža pa ne predstavlja državnega organa, temveč predstavlja alternativni mehanizem reševanja sporov, pri katerem se stranke s sklenitvijo arbitražnega sporazuma dogovorijo, da bo o njihovem sporu odločil arbitražni tribunal, sestavljen iz strokovnjakov, ki si jih bodo stranke izbrale same. Ob tako imenovani “zasebni” naravi arbitražnih postopkov se zato postavlja vprašanje, ali je ustavna procesna jamstva potrebno spoštovati tudi v teh postopkih. Predmetno delo odgovarja na navedeno vprašanje s predstavitvijo relevantne sodne prakse, ki sta jo Evropska komisija za človekove pravice in Evropsko sodišče za človekove pravice razvila v zvezi z uporabo prvega odstavka 6. člena Evropske konvencije o varstvu človekovih pravic in temeljnih svoboščin v arbitražnih postopkih in v kateri ugotavljata, da je arbitražno sojenje povsem dopustno z vidika Evropske konvencije o varstvu človekovih pravic in temeljnih svoboščin. Pri tem pa tudi opozarja na v sodni praksi še ne odgovorjena vprašanja in ponudi odgovore s predstavitvijo stališč, ki jih zastopa pravna teorija, in relevantnih pravnih pravil. V ta namen magistrsko delo naprej predstavi, zakaj so temeljna procesna jamstva sploh relevantna v arbitražnih postopkih. Temu sledi predstavitev odnosa med pravico do sodišča in arbitražnimi postopki, pri čemer se osredotoča na vprašanje, ali posledica sklenitve arbitražnega sporazuma, ki se kaže v izključitvi možnosti sodišč, da odločajo o sporu, krši pravico do sodišča. Nadalje predmetno delo predstavi, ali sklenitev arbitražnega sporazuma pomeni, da so se stranke odpovedale procesnim jamstvom, in ali imajo arbitražni tribunali v skladu z Evropsko konvencijo o varstvu človekovih pravic in temeljnih svoboščin sploh obveznost zagotavljati temeljna procesna jamstva. V okviru navedenega sledi pregled obstoječe prakse glede odgovornosti države za nadzor arbitražnih postopkov in predstavitev pravnih sredstev, ki jih imajo na voljo stranke arbitražnih postopkov v primeru kršitev temeljnih procesnih jamstev.

• Language: Slovenian
• Keywords: temeljna procesna jamstva, arbitraža, arbitražni postopek, prvi odstavek 6. člena EKČP, pravica do sodišča, pravica do poštenega postopka, odgovornost države za nadzor arbitražnih postopkih
• Work type: Master's thesis/paper
• Organization: PF - Faculty of Law
• Year: 2019
• PID: 20.500.12556/RUL-107481
• COBISS.SI-ID: 16776785
• Publication date in RUL: 19.04.2019

Secondary language

• Language: English
• Title: Fundamental Procedural Guarantees in Arbitration

Abstract

The fundamental procedural guarantees, such as the right to a court, the right to an independent, impartial and lawful judge, the right to a public trial and the right to a trial within reasonable time, are rights guaranteed at the constitutional and international level, which provide individuals with procedural protection vis-à-vis national authorities. The arbitration cannot be considered as a state body, since it is an alternative dispute settlement mechanism whereby, by concluding an arbitration agreement, the parties agree to submit a dispute to an arbitration tribunal composed of experts chosen by the parties themselves. Considering the “private” nature of arbitration proceedings, the question arises as to whether constitutional procedural guarantees must also be respected in arbitration. This master thesis answers the aforementioned question by presenting the relevant case-law of the European Commission of Human Rights and the European Court of Human Rights which was developed in connection with the application of Article 6 (1) of the European Convention on Human Rights in arbitration proceedings, and notes that arbitration is admissible in the light of the aforementioned Convention. Moreover, it also points out yet unanswered questions and offers answers by presenting the view of the legal theory and the relevant legal rules. For this purpose, this master thesis explains why the fundamental procedural guarantees are even relevant in arbitration proceedings. Furthermore, it explains the relationship between the right to a court and the arbitral proceedings, focusing on the question of whether the consequence of the conclusion of an arbitration agreement, that is the exclusion of the possibility for the courts to decide on the dispute, violates the right to a court. The next part of the master thesis explains whether the conclusion of an arbitration agreement means that the parties waived their procedural guarantees enshrined in Article 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights, and examines whether the arbitration tribunal has any obligation to provide procedural guarantees. In the last part, the thesis analyses the existing practice regarding state’s responsibility for the supervision of arbitration proceedings and presents the legal remedies available to the parties in case of violations of the fundamental procedural guarantees.

• Keywords: fundamental procedural guarantees, arbitration, arbitral proceedings, Article 6 (1) of the ECHR, right to a court, right to a fair hearing, state's responsibility for the supervision of arbitration proceedings