See below English version.
Los persas
Escribir un blog desde el Valle de Guadalupe, es a la vez difícil, fácil y temerario. Difícil porque en esta región hermosa se antoja pasear, ver y disfrutar; un blog suena, y es, aburrido. Fácil porque el país del vino mexicano y sus productos, estimulan la imaginacion. Temerario porque cuando Baco nos arrulla, la imaginación se dispara.
Cuenta Herodoto que los "Persas son muy aficionados al vino …Después de bien bebidos, suelen deliberar sobre los negocios de mayor importancia. Lo que entonces resuelven, lo propone otra vez el amo de la casa en que deliberaron, un día después; y si lo acordado les parece bien en ayunas, lo ponen en ejecución, y si no, lo revocan. También suelen volver a examinar cuando han bebido bien aquello mismo sobre lo que han deliberado en estado de sobriedad".
Con estas advertencias … ¡A ver que sale!
La atenta observación de la realidad
El capítulo X sobre la intervención judicial en el arbitraje se comenzó a gestar a partir de la CNY. Probablmente antes. Se aceleró a partir de la entrada en vigor de la reforma sobre el arbitraje, en julio de 1993. Maduró y dio fruto en enero de 2011.
Conforme se incrementó el uso del arbitraje, para bien o para mal, creció la intervención judicial y la experiencia. Todavía falta mucho camino para recorrer, pero la reforma de enero de 2011, le debe mucho a la experiencia previa de los tribunales judiciales.
Prejuicios y perjuicios
Todavía es muy fuerte la influencia de la cultura del "no arbitraje"; estamos en los inicios del "'neo arbitraje". Son muchos los que consideran al arbitraje como una institución de segunda clase, contra el cual tienen muchos prejuicios; entre ellos el de que no ofrece garantías ni certidumbre de su ejecutabilidad y cumplimiento. Siguen bajo la influencia de su gen cultural litigioso.
Algunos están convencidos de sus prejuicios; otros sólo buscan obstruir o dilatar. Recuedo a un amigo, sincero y ocurrente, que me decía que lo que le inquietaba del arbitraje era que dejaría de tener recursos, recursos sobre recursos y supra recursos. Que no podría prolongar el caso si le era desfavorable. Reconozco que no es fácil aceptar la idea de arriesgarlo todo a una instancia; como en una final de fútbol: al final del partido sólo queda aceptar y prepararse para el siguente caso.
Fuerza obligatoria del contrato
Sin importar las razones que tuvieron para ello, si las partes convinieron el arbitraje, tienen el derecho y la obligación de someterse al arbitraje. El principio del cumplimiento de los contratos es pilar de la seguridad jurídica, de las sanas relaciones, de la economía y, especialmente, del comercio. Se justifican exepciones expresas y limitadas; como cuando la ley busca preservar el equilibrio en las relaciones entre proveedores y consumidores
También se justifica la intervención judicial para obligar al cumplimiento del acuerdo arbitral. Sobre todo cuando el procedimiento del arbitraje no se ajustó al convenio de las partes, o violó el principio del trato igual y el derecho a ser oído. También cuando el laudo es aberrante, porque sus consideraciones y decisiones repugnan a los mas elementales criterios de justicia y equidad, o atentan contra el sistema finaciero del país.
Si las partes convinieron el arbitraje, e hicieron todos los esfuerzos y gastos para obtener el laudo, incluso pagaron los honorarios de los árbitros, no se vale que luego unos jueces lo revisen. Un número indeterminado de jueces a los que se asignará el caso en diversas instancias, y a quienes las partes no consideraron en su acuerdo de arbitraje, si no fue para excluir su intervención. Unos jueces en cuya designación no intervinieron las partes.
William Park cita una decisión de hace mas de ciento cincuenta años, en la que una corte de los Estados Unidos decidió que "[S]i el laudo se cae dentro del ámbito del acuerdo, y contiene la decisión honesta de los árbitros, dictada después de dar a las partes audiencia justa e igual, una corte no puede anularlo por error de hecho o legal. Un curso de acción contrario sería la sustitución por el juzgador de los árbitros escogidos por las partes, y el laudo sería el comienzo, y no el fin, del litigio" ("Dictum of the SC Burchell Marsh 1855". En un comentario que agregaré a mi regreso pondré los datos de la fuente)
Declaración de principios de CANACO
Repito, las partes se sometieron a la decisión de los árbitros y deben cumplir sus decisiones. A este respecto, se antoja citar la la declaración de principios de CANACO, según la cual "el arbitraje mercantil no debe ser sólo una batalla legal, sino una averiguación honesta a cargo de personas prudentes, a la luz de los principios de la buena fe y los usos de la industria o comercio involucrados".
La declaración de CANACO continúa diciendo que la misión de los árbitros es una investigación que tiene el propósito de conocer las estipulaciones de las partes cuando celebraron el contrato o entraron en una relación, en su caso las modificaciones que convinieron, el modo en que ejecutaron el contrato, las legítimas expectativas de las partes y las causas de la disputa. Con este conocimiento, el tribunal arbitral debe emitir el laudo o laudos, definitivos y vinculantes, que den soluciones razonables y justas, no legalistas, a las cuestiones sometidas al Tribunal. Bien aplicados los principios del cualquier sistema legal, salvo que sea primitivo o esté ideológicamente distorsionado, por necesidad conducirá a similares resultados".
Los laudos no deben ser revisados con criterios formales, rígidos y legalistas.
Otras molestias
Igualmente, es una aberración que se obstruya la marcha del arbitraje por intervención de un juez, sólo porque una parte, en violación a un acuerdo de arbitraje, presentó una demanda judicial. Es una aberración que el arbitraje no pueda iniciarse o continuarse por una orden judicial, y que quede en espera de que se decida el juicio sobre la competencia del tribunal arbitral, o la existencia o validez del acuerdo de arbitraje.
Lo mismo cuando un juez dicta medidas precautorias ordenando la suspensión del arbitraje. ¡Que decepcionante es que un miembro del poder judicial ponga en duda ante la comunidad mundial la credibilidad de la justicia arbitral y judicial de su país!
Hay paises en los que si los testigos no comparecen, el tribunal arbitral tiene que recurrir a los tribunales judiciales para que le auxilien en el desahogo de la prueba. De nuevo, la resolución del arbitraje quedará para las Calendas Griegas.
En fin, hay muchos otros motivos de tentación y es necesario recordar que es voluntad de las partes ponerse en las manos de los árbitros.
No molestar
No era necesario explicitar el principio de que una corte judicial no puede intervenir en el arbitraje salvo en los casos expresamente previstos por la LMA. Sin embargo, considerando las razones arriba apuntadas, desde 1985, se decidió que era bueno mantener el artículo 5 LMA (artículo 1421 del Cco).
En la próxima entrada comentaré algunas cuestiones importantes relativas al artículo 5, así como algunas decisiones interesantes que reporta el CLOUT sobre su interpretación.
¡Salud!
--------
To write a blog from the Guadalupe Valley is hard, easy and a temerity at the same time. Hard because in this beautiful region one longs to go for a stroll, to see and enjoy; a blog sounds, and is, boring. Easy because the country of Mexican wine and its products stimulate imagination. A temerity because when Bacchus lulls to sleep, the imagination runs wildly.
--------
Supplementary Legislation for the UMLA. In the Valley of Wine, do not disturb. Chapter X on Court Intervention in Arbitration
Persians
To write a blog from the Guadalupe Valley is hard, easy and a temerity at the same time. Hard because in this beautiful region one longs to go for a stroll, to see and enjoy; a blog sounds, and is, boring. Easy because the country of Mexican wine and its products stimulate imagination. A temerity because when Bacchus lulls to sleep, the imagination runs wildly.
Herodotus tells that the "Persians are very fond of wine… If an important decision is to be made, they discuss the question when they are drunk, and the following day the master of the house where the discussion was held submits their decision for reconsideration when they are sober. If they still approve it, it is adopted; if not, it is abandoned. Conversely, any decision taken when they are sober, is reconsidered afterwards when they are drunk".
After these warnings … Let's see what comes of it!
Attentive Observation of Reality
Chapter X on court intervention in arbitration began to develop with the NYC. Probably before. It accelerated when the reform on arbitration came into force in July of 1993. It matured and gave fruit in January of 2011.
As the use of arbitration increased, for good or for ill court intervention also increased and so the experience as well. There is still much path to walk on, but the reform on January of 2011 owes much to the previous experience of courts.
Prejudice and Damages ("Prejuicios y Perjuicios")
The influence of "no arbitration" is still very strong; we are in the beginnings of the "neo arbitration" Many are those who consider arbitration to be like a second class institution, with respect to which they hold many prejudices; among them is that it does not offer any guaranties of certainty of its enforceability and fulfillment. They are sill under the influence of their litigious cultural gene.
Some are convinced of their prejudices; others merely seek to obstruct and delay. I remember a sincere and witty friend, who said to me that what troubled him of arbitration was that he would cease to have recourses, recourses against recourses and supra recourses. That he would not be able to extend the case if it was unfavorable. I acknowledge that it is not easy to accept the idea of risking all to a sole procedural stage; as in a sports, final: at the end of the game all one can do is to accept whatever happened and to prepare for the next case.
Binding Force of the Contract
Regardless of the reasons they had, if the parties agreed arbitration, they have the right and the obligation to arbitrate. The principle of "pacta sunt servanda" is the foundation of the legal certainty, of healthy relationships, economy and, specially, commerce. Express and limited exceptions are justified; such as when the law seeks to preserve the balance in the relations between providers and consumers.
Court intervention is also justified to oblige to the fulfillment of the arbitration agreement. Specially when the arbitration procedure did not run in accordance with the agreement of the parties, or violated the principle of equal treatment and the right to be heard. Also when the award is aberrant, because its considerations and decisions are repugnant to the most basic criteria of justice and equity, or threaten the financial system of the country.
If the parties agreed to arbitrate, and they put all their efforts and costs to obtain the award, including the fees of the arbitrators, it is not just to allow the courts to review it. To submit it to an undetermined number of courts to which the case will be assigned in several stages, and which the parties did not consider in their arbitration agreement, save for excluding their intervention. Judges in whose designation the parties had no saying; contrary to what happened with the arbitration proceedings.
William Park quotes a decision of more than fifty years ago, in which a United States court decided that that if the award falls within the scope of the agreement, and contains the honest decision of the arbitrators, issued after providing the parties a just and equal opportunity to be heard, a court may not set it aside for a factual or legal mistake. A contrary course of action would be the substitution by the courts of the arbitrators chosen by the parties, and the award would be the beginning, but not the end, of litigation ("Dictum of the SC Burchell Marsh 1855").
CANACO Declaration of Principles
I repeat, the parties submitted to the decision of the arbitrators and must comply with their decisions. To this respect, I find appropriate to quote the declaration of principles of CANACO, pursuant to which "commercial arbitration should not be merely a legal battle, but an honest inquiry entrusted to prudent persons, in light of the principles of good faith and the usages of industry and commerce involved.”
The declaration of CANACO then provides that the mission of arbitrators is an inquiry that has the purpose of ascertaining the stipulations of the parties when they executed the contract or entered into a relationship, the modifications they may have agreed upon, the way in which they performed the contract, the legitimate expectations of the parties and the causes of the dispute. With this knowledge, the arbitral tribunal must issue the award or awards, final and binding, which provide reasonable and just solutions, not legalists, to the matters submitted to the tribunal. Well applied, the principles of any legal system, unless it is a primitive one or ideologically distorted, by necessity will conduct to similar results.
Awards should not be reviewed with formalistic, rigid and legalist criteria.
Other Disturbances
Likewise, it is an aberration to obstruct the course of an arbitration by the intervention of a court, merely because one of the parties, in violation of the arbitration agreement, filed a judicial petition. It is an aberration that the arbitration cannot be initiated or continued because of a court ruling, and is left waiting for the end of the judicial proceedings on the jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal, or the existence or validity of the arbitration agreement.
After these warnings … Let's see what comes of it!
Attentive Observation of Reality
Chapter X on court intervention in arbitration began to develop with the NYC. Probably before. It accelerated when the reform on arbitration came into force in July of 1993. It matured and gave fruit in January of 2011.
As the use of arbitration increased, for good or for ill court intervention also increased and so the experience as well. There is still much path to walk on, but the reform on January of 2011 owes much to the previous experience of courts.
Prejudice and Damages ("Prejuicios y Perjuicios")
The influence of "no arbitration" is still very strong; we are in the beginnings of the "neo arbitration" Many are those who consider arbitration to be like a second class institution, with respect to which they hold many prejudices; among them is that it does not offer any guaranties of certainty of its enforceability and fulfillment. They are sill under the influence of their litigious cultural gene.
Some are convinced of their prejudices; others merely seek to obstruct and delay. I remember a sincere and witty friend, who said to me that what troubled him of arbitration was that he would cease to have recourses, recourses against recourses and supra recourses. That he would not be able to extend the case if it was unfavorable. I acknowledge that it is not easy to accept the idea of risking all to a sole procedural stage; as in a sports, final: at the end of the game all one can do is to accept whatever happened and to prepare for the next case.
Binding Force of the Contract
Regardless of the reasons they had, if the parties agreed arbitration, they have the right and the obligation to arbitrate. The principle of "pacta sunt servanda" is the foundation of the legal certainty, of healthy relationships, economy and, specially, commerce. Express and limited exceptions are justified; such as when the law seeks to preserve the balance in the relations between providers and consumers.
Court intervention is also justified to oblige to the fulfillment of the arbitration agreement. Specially when the arbitration procedure did not run in accordance with the agreement of the parties, or violated the principle of equal treatment and the right to be heard. Also when the award is aberrant, because its considerations and decisions are repugnant to the most basic criteria of justice and equity, or threaten the financial system of the country.
If the parties agreed to arbitrate, and they put all their efforts and costs to obtain the award, including the fees of the arbitrators, it is not just to allow the courts to review it. To submit it to an undetermined number of courts to which the case will be assigned in several stages, and which the parties did not consider in their arbitration agreement, save for excluding their intervention. Judges in whose designation the parties had no saying; contrary to what happened with the arbitration proceedings.
William Park quotes a decision of more than fifty years ago, in which a United States court decided that that if the award falls within the scope of the agreement, and contains the honest decision of the arbitrators, issued after providing the parties a just and equal opportunity to be heard, a court may not set it aside for a factual or legal mistake. A contrary course of action would be the substitution by the courts of the arbitrators chosen by the parties, and the award would be the beginning, but not the end, of litigation ("Dictum of the SC Burchell Marsh 1855").
CANACO Declaration of Principles
I repeat, the parties submitted to the decision of the arbitrators and must comply with their decisions. To this respect, I find appropriate to quote the declaration of principles of CANACO, pursuant to which "commercial arbitration should not be merely a legal battle, but an honest inquiry entrusted to prudent persons, in light of the principles of good faith and the usages of industry and commerce involved.”
The declaration of CANACO then provides that the mission of arbitrators is an inquiry that has the purpose of ascertaining the stipulations of the parties when they executed the contract or entered into a relationship, the modifications they may have agreed upon, the way in which they performed the contract, the legitimate expectations of the parties and the causes of the dispute. With this knowledge, the arbitral tribunal must issue the award or awards, final and binding, which provide reasonable and just solutions, not legalists, to the matters submitted to the tribunal. Well applied, the principles of any legal system, unless it is a primitive one or ideologically distorted, by necessity will conduct to similar results.
Awards should not be reviewed with formalistic, rigid and legalist criteria.
Other Disturbances
Likewise, it is an aberration to obstruct the course of an arbitration by the intervention of a court, merely because one of the parties, in violation of the arbitration agreement, filed a judicial petition. It is an aberration that the arbitration cannot be initiated or continued because of a court ruling, and is left waiting for the end of the judicial proceedings on the jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal, or the existence or validity of the arbitration agreement.
The same may be said when a court issues provisional measures ordering the stay of the arbitration. How disappointing it is to see a judge to put in jeopardy before the international community the credibility of the arbitral and judicial justice of his country!
There are countries in which if the witnesses do not appear, the arbitral tribunal has to refer to the courts to seek assistance to obtain their testimony. Again, the resolution of the arbitration will be left to the Greek Calendas.
In the end, there are many causes of temptation and it is necessary to remember that it is the parties' will to put their case in the hands of the arbitrators.
Do Not Disturb
It was not necessary to expressly state the principle that a judicial court may not intervene in arbitration save those cases expressly contained in the UMLA. However, considering the reasons pointed above, since 1985, it was decided that it was good to keep article 5 of the UMLA (article 1421 of the Commerce Code).
In the next post I will comment on some important issues related to article 5, as well as with some interesting decisions reported in the CLOUT on its interpretation.
Salud!
There are countries in which if the witnesses do not appear, the arbitral tribunal has to refer to the courts to seek assistance to obtain their testimony. Again, the resolution of the arbitration will be left to the Greek Calendas.
In the end, there are many causes of temptation and it is necessary to remember that it is the parties' will to put their case in the hands of the arbitrators.
Do Not Disturb
It was not necessary to expressly state the principle that a judicial court may not intervene in arbitration save those cases expressly contained in the UMLA. However, considering the reasons pointed above, since 1985, it was decided that it was good to keep article 5 of the UMLA (article 1421 of the Commerce Code).
In the next post I will comment on some important issues related to article 5, as well as with some interesting decisions reported in the CLOUT on its interpretation.
Salud!
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario