The distinction between
an agreed arbitral procedure and an imposed court is important.
Not exact matches
581 (2004), where the court held that an arbitrator's failure to state reasons, as required by the rules of the American Arbitration Association
agreed upon by the parties, was not considered part of the
arbitral procedure.
Article V (1)(d) places no express limitation on the autonomy of the parties to
agree on the composition of the
arbitral tribunal or the
arbitral procedure.
For instance, a German court enforced an award rendered in Turkey where the parties had
agreed to the rules of the
Arbitral Commission of the Istanbul Chamber of Commerce and Industry, and rejected a party's argument that the
procedure was not in accordance with the requirements of the Turkish Code of Civil
Procedure.866
European Convention on International Commercial Arbitration, Geneva, 21 April 1961, Article VIII: «The parties shall be presumed to have
agreed that reasons shall be given for the award unless they (a) either expressly declare that reasons shall not be given; or (b) have assented to an
arbitral procedure under which it is not customary to give reasons for awards, provided that in this case neither party requests before the end of the hearing, or if there has not been a hearing then before the making of the award, that reasons be given.»
The
arbitral award is to be rendered according to the
procedures agreed to between the parties and the provisions of the arbitration law.