The New Spanish Arbitration Law Reform Act
This post has been written by Miguel Gómez Jene, Senior Lecturer of Private International Law at the UNED (Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia)
On May 21st, the Spanish official Gazette (www.boe.es) published the reform of the Arbitration Act. This Act amends certain provisions concerning the Arbitration legislation (2003). From the point of view of international private law, the most significant changes involve the reallocation of competence in arbitration matters. Indeed, after the coming into force of the Reform (twenty days after its publication), the corresponding High Court of each “autonomous community” (Tribunales Superiores de Justicia de las Comunidades Autónomas) shall be competent for exequatur and annulment proceedings and appointment of arbitrators. Although this modification appears desirable, it should be noted that no appeal is possible against the judgment of the High Court resolving the exequatur or annulment proceedings. Therefore the Spanish Supreme Court has no competence to deal with arbitration matters.
The prima facie standard of review for the validity of arbitration agreements has also been affected. Specifically, the amendments concern the period to submit the objection to jurisdiction. This objection to jurisdiction shall be made in the first ten days of period to answer the claim.
The possibility of arbitration in relation to company disputes has been expressly affirmed. However two special requirements have been made. First, the introduction of the arbitration agreement in the by-laws of the company requires two thirds of the votes corresponding to shares or participations. Secondly, arbitration in company disputes must be submitted to institutional arbitration. Incomprehensibly, ad hoc arbitrations are not allowed in these matters.
The Reform introduces a new regulative framework for the relationship between arbitrator and mediator. This regulation states that, unless otherwise agreed, a mediator shall not be able to become the arbitrator in the same dispute between the parties.
The expiration of a temporal limit to render an award shall not affect its validity any longer. Previously there was a six months period to render the arbitral award. Such period of time led to a contradictory case law in order to its consideration as a ground for setting aside the award. Furthermore the temporal limit was also considered a very short period of time to render an award in an international arbitration.
The reform also provides an important new amendment regarding the scope of rectification and interpretation of the award. In cases where arbitrators have decided upon matters which have not been submitted to their consideration or upon not arbitrable matters, parties may request for a rectification of “partial extra limitation” to the arbitral tribunal.
Finally, it should be noted that the Bankruptcy Act has also been amended in order to maintain the validity of the arbitral agreement in cases of declaration of bankruptcy.
Thank you for this inspiring overview of the recent Spanish reform, professor Gómez Jene!
How do you assess that the Spanish Supreme Court has no competence to deal with arbitration matters?