polish

key issues

petition to set aside arbitration award

| all issues

All documents for the issue: 334

Case law: 149 | Bibliography: 167 | Publications arbitraz.laszczuk.pl: 2 | Publications ADR. Arbitraż i Mediacja: 16

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 7 October 2016 Case No. I CSK 592/15

1. The essence of an action to set aside an arbitration award is to provide a review mechanism respecting on one hand the separateness and autonomy of arbitration, and on the other hand preventing the functioning in legal circulation of rulings by non-state courts infringing the rule of law. A proceeding to set aside an arbitration award does not lead to reconsideration of the merits of the dispute between the parties, but is intended only to verify the applicant’s allegations of the existence of the grounds raised in the application provided for in Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §1, and assess whether any of the grounds provided for in Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §2 exist, whether or not asserted by the applicant.

2. Depriving a party of the ability to defend its rights before the arbitral tribunal occurs when the arbitral tribunal for example failed to notify the party of the date of the hearing after which the award was announced, when it did not hear out the party at all or give the party the opportunity to submit statements with respect to the matter in dispute. It does not constitute depriving a party of a defence to fail to admit and consider evidence offered by the party, if the arbitral tribunal justifies that procedural decision duly and in accordance with the accepted rules.

 3. Violation of the fundamental principles of the Polish legal system may occur in the realm of both substantive law and procedural law, which leads to a distinction between the substantive legal system and the procedural legal system. The fundamental principles of the Polish legal system should be understood to mean constitutional principles as well as the leading principles of other fields of substantive and procedural law; the latter undoubtedly include the principle of the equality of the parties.

Data wydania: 07-10-2016 | Sygnatura: I CSK 592/15

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20432

Warsaw Court of Appeal order dated 28 September 2016 Case No. I ACa 843/16

1. Art. 9 of [the Act of 10 September 2015 Amending Certain Acts to Encourage Amicable Methods of Dispute Resolution] ensures the continuity of application of the prior regulations of procedural law in cases pursuant to a petition to set an arbitration award which were commenced before the state courts prior to 1 January 2016. In cases in which a petition to set aside an arbitration award is filed with the state court after 31 December 2015, the new regulations apply.

2. Compliance with the deadline for filing a petition to set aside an arbitration award, filed with a state court not authorized to consider cases of this type, is determined by the date on which the unauthorized court (not having subject-matter jurisdiction) forwarded the case to the proper court.

Data wydania: 28-09-2016 | Sygnatura: I ACa 843/16

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20436

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 6 May 2016 Case No. I CSK 305/15

1. A petition to set aside an arbitration award is a claim to establish a legal relationship, in which the plaintiff (the petitioner) demands that the state court issue a judgment setting aside (vacating) the existing legal relationship established by the arbitration award. A judgment by the state court granting the petition is of a quashing nature, as in such situation the state court can only set aside the arbitration award, and only insofar as demanded by the petitioner.

2. Even though the relief stated in a petition to set aside an arbitration award may involve setting aside the entirety of the arbitration award or part of the award, the state court is bound by the scope of the petition against by the award by the petitioner, and thus the bounds of the petitioner’s application.

3. Exceptionally, it is possible to grant a demand to set aside an arbitration court in part, but only when the challenged part of the ruling can be entirely separated from the rest of the award.

Data wydania: 06-05-2016 | Sygnatura: I CSK 305/15

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20419

Warsaw Court of Appeal judgment dated 9 March 2016 Case no. I ACa 796/15

1. An arbitration court cannot be regarded as a body of the justice system to which Art. 45 of the Constitution applies directly.

2. Pursuant to Art. 1184 §2 of the Civil Procedure Code, the arbitration court is not bound by regulations on procedure before the state court, and thus in particular Art. 328 §2 of the Civil Procedure Code, setting forth the requirements for the justification of a judgment.

3. Even an erroneous interpretation of regulations of substantive law of fundamental importance for the resolution, made by the arbitral tribunal, does not necessarily mean violation of the public policy clause. The assessment of whether the ruling violates fundamental principles of the legal order should thus be conducted on a case-by-case basis, narrowly, and an affirmative conclusion may be reached only if the effects of the ruling of the arbitral tribunal would result in a material violation of the fundamental principles covered by the public policy clause.

Data wydania: 09-03-2016 | Sygnatura: I ACa 796/15

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20425

Polish Supreme Court judgment Dated 29 October 2015 Case No. I CSK 922/14

Examination of the case with respect to the grounds for setting aside an award under Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §2(2) may not proceed beyond aggravated violations of law. This position results directly from the wording of this provision, which authorizes the state court to set aside an arbitration award if it finds that it is contrary to fundamental principles of the legal order of the Republic of Poland, and not if it is inconsistent with just any regulation in force in that system.

Data wydania: 29-10-2015 | Sygnatura: I CSK 922/14

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20409

Warsaw Court of Appeal judgment dated 18 June 2015 Case No. I ACa 1822/14

1. An arbitration clause, which is an agreement to submit a dispute to an arbitration court for resolution, may be limited in time; that is, it may be in force only until a certain time, at the end of which it ceases to be in force; it may also be made under a condition applicable to the clause itself or the manner of proceeding and resolution by the arbitral tribunal.

2. Civil Procedure Code Art. 1168 governs situations in which the arbitration clause may cease to be in force (if the parties have not agreed on other legal consequences of events covered by the clause). The list set forth in this provision is therefore only exemplary, and the parties may also indicate other situations which will result in expiration (loss of force) of the arbitration clause. This is not changed by the fact that the current law does not regulate the loss of force of an arbitration clause in a situation where the time agreed by the parties in which the arbitral tribunal was required to issue an award expired, because the parties can provide otherwise. In the case considered here, the contractual specification of the deadline for completion of the proceeding before the arbitral tribunal with an award exerts the effect of expiration of the arbitration clause. Therefore this is not an instructive deadline whose only purpose was to encourage all of the participants in the arbitration proceeding, including also the arbitral tribunal, to seek a quick and effective resolution of the dispute.

3. Even when specifying its own rules for proceeding before the arbitral tribunal, the arbitral tribunal is not authorized to modify the mutual position of the parties with respect to the deadline set by them for resolution of the case. Such modification may be made by the parties themselves, but not by the arbitral tribunal.

4. In the event of doubt with respect to the scope of the arbitration clause, a restrictive interpretation should prevail. In interpreting the arbitration clause, it is not permissible to employ any presumptions which would indicate broader application of the arbitration clause. The declarations of will in the arbitration clause may not be supplemented by way of interpretation to include further external elements, events or occurrences.

Data wydania: 18-06-2015 | Sygnatura: I ACa 1822/14

Key issues: arbitration agreement, arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20401

Warsaw Court of Appeal judgment dated 7 May 2015 Case I ACa 1557/14

In light of the formalized nature of proceedings on a petition to set aside an arbitration award, as expressed in the exhaustive list of grounds for the petition and the fact that the court is bound by the grounds asserted in the petition, the mere fact that the bounds of the petition extend to the entire arbitration award is insufficient to consider during the appellate proceeding an allegation that was not asserted in the petition.  

It is accepted that an arbitration award is subject to being set aside under the public policy clause if an infringement of substantive law by the arbitration court leads to consequences irreconcilable with the fundamental principles of the Polish legal system, that is, effects that are plainly and grossly contrary to such principles or any one of them.

The principle of the freedom of economic activity is one of the fundamental principles of the Polish legal system.

Data wydania: 07-05-2015 | Sygnatura: I ACa 1557/14

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20398

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 20 March 2015 Case No. II CSK 352/14

1. Parties who have submitted a dispute to a permanent arbitration court for resolution in accordance with its rules may in provisions accompanying the arbitration clause or by later agreement modify the provisions of the rules. … Acceptance by the permanent arbitration court (or its authorities) of changes to the rules made by the parties is another issue. The arbitration court may consent to conduct the proceeding in compliance with the rules as modified by the parties, or not accept the changes. However, if it does not accept the changes, the permanent arbitration court can only refuse to accept the case for consideration (Civil Procedure Code Art. 1168 §2), but it cannot conduct the proceeding according to the rules in the version that does not reflect the changes made by the parties if they refuse to give up those changes. If the permanent arbitration court has accepted the case for consideration, then it is required to respect the intent of the parties as manifest in the changes they have made to the rules of the arbitration court.

2. The priority of the intent of the parties over the rules of the permanent arbitration court applies as well when the parties have agreed that the arbitration proceeding is to include two instances, while the rules provide that the proceeding has one instance.

3. If the parties agree that the proceeding before the arbitration court is to include more than one instance (Civil Procedure Code Art. 1205 §2), then the arbitration regulations of the Civil Procedure Code and the principles and rules resulting therefrom also apply to the appellate arbitral tribunal, including establishment of the rules and manner of proceeding before that tribunal and ruling by that tribunal.

4. The rule specified by the parties that the arbitration proceeding is to include the possibility of appealing against the arbitration award issued at the first instance undoubtedly falls within the group of fundamental rules for purposes of Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §1(4). Violation of that rule by resolving the dispute at only one instance is a violation that could affect the result in the case, because the appeal could result in a different resolution.

5. Under the circumstances of the case, there was a violation of Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §1(4) by considering the dispute and issuing an arbitration award at only one instance, contrary to the rule agreed by the parties of arbitration proceedings at two instances.

Data wydania: 20-03-2015 | Sygnatura: II CSK 352/14

Key issues: arbitration agreement, arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20399

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 19 March 2015 Case No. IV CSK 443/14

1. The FIDIC conditions are a set of procedures and conditions describing the course of construction projects. Among other things, they describe the rights and obligations of the participants in the construction process, including in clause 20 the procedure for disputes and arbitration. … Interpretation of the provisions included in the FIDIC conditions included in the contract in force between the parties is made in accordance with the principles of interpretation of declarations of will (contracts) set forth in Art. 56 and Art. 65 §§ 1 and 2 of the Civil Code.

2. Pursuant to FIDIC clause 20.4, “If a dispute (of any kind whatsoever) arises between the Parties in connection with, or arising out of, the Contract or the execution of the Works, … either Party may refer the dispute in writing to the DAB [dispute adjudication board]”. The use of the word “may” in this clause should be understood only to mean that pursuit of claims is a right and not an obligation of a party. But if the party does decide to pursue the claim, according to FIDIC clause 20 it must submit the claim to a dispute adjudication board.

3. Pursuant to FIDIC clause 20.8, “If a dispute arises between the Parties in connection with, or arising out of, the Contract or the execution of the Works and there is no DAB [dispute adjudication board] in place, whether by reason of the expiry of the DAB’s appointment or otherwise: Sub-Clause 20.4 [Obtaining Dispute Adjudication Board’s Decision] and Sub-Clause 20.5 [Amicable Settlement] shall not apply, and the dispute may be referred directly to arbitration under Sub-Clause 20.6 [Arbitration].” Under the circumstances of this case, the possibility of referring the dispute directly to arbitration arose “otherwise,” i.e. by the parties’ failure to agree on the composition of the dispute adjudication board and failure by either of them to apply to the appointing authority to appoint the DAB.

4. The fundamental principles of the legal order are fundamental constitutional principles and the leading principles governing specific fields of substantive and procedural law.

Data wydania: 19-03-2015 | Sygnatura: IV CSK 443/14

Key issues: jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20395

Warsaw Court of Appeal judgment dated 15 December 2014 Case No. VI ACa 311/14

1. It is permissible to seek to set aside an arbitration award in part, if the challenged resolution can be separated from the remaining part of the award.

2. In a proceeding to set aside an arbitration award, the court cannot set aside the award in part if the petitioner applied to set aside the award in its entirety and there are grounds to grant the petition. This is because a demand to set aside an arbitration award in part is not a lesser included demand in a demand to set aside the award in its entirety; it is a different type of demand. Moreover, if the particular parts of the award interlock so that none of the parts can be separated from the other parts without materially deforming the entirety, it is impermissible to set aside the award in part.

3. Informing a party only in the justification of the award that (despite denying the claim in its entirety) one of the party’s demands was not considered because the fee for that claim was not paid, when that demand was the subject of examination during the evidentiary proceeding and was the subject of the response to the statement of claim and pleadings by both parties, while at the same time granting the demands of the opposing party in their entirety, which resolution was dependent on the resolution of the plaintiff’s demands, indicates that the arbitration award is contrary to the public policy clause, depriving the party of the ability to exercise the rights provided by regulations of substantive law and also indirectly depriving the party of a defence against the counterclaims of the opposing party. This method of proceeding before the arbitration court violates the party’s right to a fair and honest trial.

4. Resolving the respondent’s demands in their entirety before resolving the claimant’s complete demand, regardless of whether or not the party could apply for supplementation of the award, is also contrary to fundamental principles of the legal order, including violation of the principle of equal treatment of the parties. Moreover, the arbitration court would already be bound by the award issued by it in the part concerning the counterclaim, and thus it could not issue a ruling with different substantive legal consequences. Undoubtedly the principles of a fair trial require that the party be informed prior to issuance of an award of the possible taking of a procedural decision as to one of the party’s claims, regardless of whether the claimant’s claim is deemed to be an alternative claim (as it was worded, in the event that the main claim is not upheld) or as a separate procedural claim in an accumulation of claims.

5. The defence of the ineffectiveness of an arbitration clause may be asserted not only by the respondent, but also by the claimant. However, it is indicated in the legal literature that in such case, the claimant, as the party initiating the proceeding before the arbitration court, should make a thorough analysis of the factual and legal state of the case, including issues connected with the grounds for commencement of the proceeding before the arbitration court, and if it concludes that the clause is ineffective, it should file the case with the state court, which upon the objection of the respondent will resolve the issue of the effectiveness of the clause. As indicated in the literature, asserting the ineffectiveness of the clause only at this stage violates the principle of due diligence which a professional participant in commercial dealings is required to comply with.

6. An arbitration clause may cease to be in force in the instances set forth in Civil Procedure Code Art. 1168 and 1195 §4 or in the bankruptcy law, or in the occurrence of certain substantive legal events (e.g. repudiation of the legal consequences of a declaration of will), including those indicated by the parties as the reasons for the clause ceasing to be in force. The mere change in the rules of the arbitration court does not result in loss of force of the clause, either under the regulations currently in force or in accordance with the regulations in force on the date of conclusion of the clause.

7. The mere fact that one of the parties to the arbitration participated in creation of the list of arbitrators by nominating candidates for arbitrators from among persons who are authorities in the given field does not mean that there is dependency between the arbitrator and the party or that the party has greater rights. Despite the indirect influence of the banks over a portion of some panels of arbitrators, the rules of the Court of Arbitration at [the Polish Bank Association] ensure the impartially of the arbitration court and do not violate the principle of the equality of the parties in the arbitration proceeding. Because there are numerous arbitrators [on the list], and the party does not know which of them will hear the case and does not select a specific person as presiding arbitrator, it cannot be found that the party had greater rights than its opponent.

8. A petition to set aside an arbitration award may concern issues of the procedure followed only if fundamental principles of procedure before the arbitration court, arising out of a statute or specified by the parties, were not complied with (Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §1(4)). In essence this has to do with failure to comply with fundamental principles of civil procedure, but it was not demonstrated that the arbitration court failed to comply with such principles.

Data wydania: 15-12-2014 | Sygnatura: VI ACa 311/14

Key issues: arbitrator, arbitration agreement, arbitration procedure, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20387

Warsaw Court of Appeal judgment dated 21 November 2014 Case No. VI ACa 199/14

1. The arbitration court’s ignoring evidence offered by a party because it deemed the evidence to be unnecessary cannot be regarded as depriving the party of the possibility of defending its rights, and examination of the correctness of ignoring of the evidence by the arbitration court is impermissible because that would encroach on the merits of the case. … A party is deprived of the possibility of acting only when it has been totally deprived of the ability to defend its rights, and thus when it has found itself in a situation that prevents, and not only hinders or limits the support before the arbitration court of the demands asserted by the party.

2. Since the parties voluntarily submitted disputes arising out of the contract agreed between them to the judgment of the arbitral tribunal, aware of the limitations flowing therefrom, the petitioner cannot effective accuse the arbitral tribunal of not admitting evidence it raised, particularly in a situation where the arbitral tribunal exhaustively explained the reasons for denying the application.

3. Denial of an evidentiary application cannot be grounds for alleging that an award is inconsistent with the fundamental principles of the legal order of the Republic of Poland. It should be stressed that the public policy clause, like any general clause, is indefinite, which leaves to the court considering a specific case a great degree of discretion; nonetheless, review on this basis of the elements comprising the ruling of the arbitral tribunal cannot assume the dimensions proper to a review of the merits (correctness) of the ruling. The prohibition of the review of the merits (correctness) of such ruling is connected with the essence of application of the public policy clause. In applying the clause, the point is not that the ruling being evaluated was consistent with all of the mandatorily applicable provisions of law entering into play, but that it did not exert an effect inconsistent with the fundamental principles of the national legal order.

Data wydania: 21-11-2014 | Sygnatura: VI ACa 199/14

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20416

Łódź Court of Appeal judgment dated 14 November 2014 Case No. I ACa 1084/14

1. It cannot be concluded from the principle of the autonomous will of the parties that the parties may freely depart from their earlier arrangements concerning the conditions for effective conclusion of transactions. This conclusion would actually result in violation of the autonomy of the parties and failure to respect their will. … A finding that currency hedging transactions were effectively concluded despite violation of the telephone identification procedure established by the parties’ contract could in fact violate another fundamental principle of civil law, namely the principle of the enforceability of contracts.

2. A petition to set aside an arbitration award is not an appellate instrument, but a type of extraordinary judicial review by the state court of the activity of the arbitration court. It follows that in the proceeding to set aside an arbitration award the state court cannot consider the dispute between the parties to the arbitration proceeding on the merits.

3. Violation of provisions of substantive law are subject to review in the proceeding initiated by a petition to set aside an arbitration award only the provisions violated establish principles of the public policy of the Republic of Poland, and the public policy clause should be interpreted narrowly.

Data wydania: 14-11-2014 | Sygnatura: I ACa 1084/14

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20390

Polish Supreme Court order dated 16 October 2014 Case No. III CZ 39/14

1. The subject of a ruling ending the proceedings in the case is the resolution of the dispute defined by the statement of claim or the conclusion of the proceedings with respect to that dispute. The dispute pending before the arbitration court in which an application was filed to remove an arbitrator will end before the state court with a ruling on the petition to set aside the arbitration award. It thus cannot be said that the route to consideration of the application was closed as a result of rejection of the applicant’s cassation appeal.

2. Issuance of an award by the arbitration court does not render moot a proceeding before the state court to remove an arbitrator, which proceeding will continue until the application is decided. Granting of the application could provide possible grounds for setting aside the arbitration award. Even if the application to remove an arbitrator has not been ruled on, a party which complied with the deadline for filing such application does not lose the right to rely on the existence of grounds to remove the arbitrator in the petition to set aside the award.

Data wydania: 16-10-2014 | Sygnatura: III CZ 39/14

Key issues: arbitrator, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20385

Kraków Court of Appeal judgment dated 3 October 2014 Case No. I ACa 881/14

1. The state court considering a case seeking to set aside an arbitration award cannot re-examine the merits of the dispute. … Treating the scope of review by the state court differently would undermine the autonomy of arbitration, which would place it in a kind of protectorate of the state court system, thus distorting not only the ideals on which the functioning of arbitration is based but also the intention of the Parliament, which in modifying the rules for its functioning limits the scope of intervention by the state court system to exceptional instances expressly stated in the law.

2. The state court is not entitled to review whether the arbitration court properly determined the facts and properly evaluated the evidence. This falls within the bounds of the resolution on the merits of the asserted claims.

Data wydania: 03-10-2014 | Sygnatura: I ACa 881/14

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20406

Warsaw Court of Appeal judgment dated 24 July 2014 Case No. I ACa 154/14

1. The fact that two arbitrators, constituting a majority of the panel, had already signed drafts of the awards was certainly not valid grounds for the presiding arbitrator to refuse to continue deliberations over the awards. This was not equivalent to the act of voting, not to mention equivalent to deliberations on the resolution and the grounds for the resolution. Refusal to continue the deliberations in order to discuss the comments means that it cannot be said that the deliberations were completed and voting was held on the awards. … As pointed out in the legal literature, the list of examples of violations with respect to regulations on voting, removal of an arbitrator and the award which were set forth in Civil Procedure Code Art. 712 §1(3) (in force through 16 October 2005) were not expressly carried over to the wording of Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §1(4). There is no doubt, however, that a violation of these rules should generally be treated as a violation of fundamental rules of procedure.

2. Ignoring evidence offered by a party because the arbitration court found the evidence to be unnecessary will not qualify as depriving the party of the ability to present a defence. Examination by the state court of whether the arbitration court correctly found such evidence to be unnecessary would constitute impermissible encroachment into the merits of the case. If the arbitration court ignored a certain portion of the defence presented by the party, while including in the grounds for the award a substantive explanation of the reasons it found the defence to be irrelevant, then the party’s allegation with respect to ignoring its defence is in reality directed against the substantive defence of the dispute and as such is impermissible.

Data wydania: 24-07-2014 | Sygnatura: I ACa 154/14

Key issues: arbitration procedure, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20389

Supreme Court of Poland judgment dated 15 May 2014 Case No. II CSK 557/13

1. The issue of the consistency of the resolution by the arbitration court with the determined state of facts is beyond cassation review in connection with Civil Procedure Code Art. 3983 §3.

2. The arbitration court’s violation of the substantive law governing the case, which generally is connected with Civil Procedure Code Art. 1194 §1, is subject to review by the state court considering a petition to set aside an arbitration award only in terms of application of the public policy clause—at the court’s own initiative or on the basis of an allegation in the petition.

3. The circumstances separately listed in Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §1 as grounds for setting aside an arbitration award, proof of which lies primarily in the interests of the party, are excluded from the scope of application of the public policy clause.

4. The arbitration court’s conduct of the proceeding ignoring evidence offered by a party may justify an allegation of violation of Civil Procedure Code Art. 1183 if the evidence was necessary to the resolution of the case.

5. If the evidence raised by the party was ignored as a result of the arbitration court’s interpretation of substantive law, the mere fact that the interpretation may be regarded as erroneous cannot justify granting a petition to set aside the award unless the award also violates fundamental principles of the legal order.

6. The arbitration court’s application of regulations on the limitations period or preclusion may not be regarded as a violation of fundamental principles of the legal order even if this occurred on the basis of an erroneous interpretation of the regulations.

Data wydania: 15-05-2014 | Sygnatura: II CSK 557/13

Key issues: arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20267

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 13 February 2014 Case No. V CSK 45/13

1. Application by the arbitration court of the substantive law applicable in the case is subject to review by the common court only insofar as required by the evaluation of the arbitration award, made by the court on its initiative, under the public policy clause set forth in Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §2(2), in terms of the award’s possible inconsistency with fundamental principles of the Polish legal system.

2. Alongside the principles of freedom of contract and the enforceability of contracts, the fundamental principles of the Polish legal system also include principles setting the boundaries of the freedom of contract and, in consequence, the limits of application of the principle of enforceability of contracts. These are more specifically the principle of business freedom, the principle of contractual fairness, and the principle of the compensatory nature of liability in damages, interpreted in compliance with the constitutional requirement of proportionality (Constitution Art. 31(3)), opposing inclusion in contracts of monetary consideration as a sanction for violation of an obligation in an amount far removed from the dimension of the loss, so that it becomes primarily a quasi-penal measure and leads to enrichment of the other party.

3. The reduction of the agreed contractual penalty by the arbitration court did not display the features of an arbitrary limitation of the legal consequences of providing for the contractual penalty, but fell within the bounds of statutory authority.

4. Any irregularities in application of Civil Code Art. 484 §2 by the arbitration court not resulting in the inconsistency of the award issued by it with the fundamental principles of the legal system could not be relevant in proceedings to set aside the award.

Data wydania: 13-02-2014 | Sygnatura: V CSK 45/13

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20381

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 6 February 2014 Case No. I CSK 191/13

The state court hearing a petition to set aside an arbitration award may consider whether in the specific case there were valid grounds justifying a departure [by the arbitration court] from the rule of being bound by a legally final judgment, and reference to the circumstances permitting reopening of proceedings before a state court should be helpful in this respect. … From the point of view of the grounds for reopening proceedings, there is nothing preventing new factual circumstances from being disclosed as a result of actions conducted by an expert in a different case, after the end of the proceeding that would be reopened. It is essential that they be circumstances that already existed during the course of the completed proceeding.

Data wydania: 06-02-2014 | Sygnatura: I CSK 191/13

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20384

Warsaw Court of Appeal judgment dated 15 January 2014 Case No. VI ACa 663/13

1. An arbitrator must not be connected to any of the parties to the proceeding; he should be free of any obligations and pressures, and in performing the duties of arbitrator should decide solely in accordance with his own determination, based on the material gathered in the case. Disclosure of such circumstances must be made promptly after the person is appointed as arbitrator or the circumstances arise. [Civil Procedure Code Art. 1174 §1] also refers to circumstances that could raise doubts as to the impartiality or independence of the arbitrator, not circumstances that do raise doubts.

2. The opposing party, and the not the arbitrator, is given the right to make an assessment of whether the circumstances disclosed by the arbitrator raise doubts or not, and potentially to initiate the procedure pursuant to Civil Procedure Code Art. 1176 §§ 3 and 4, including filing of an application to the state court to remove the arbitrator. It must be clearly stressed, however, that the existence of circumstances that could raise a doubt as to the independence or impartiality of an arbitrator is not equivalent to a finding of a lack of impartiality or independence of the person appointed as arbitrator.

3. The right to make a setoff is a subjective right of the holder and cannot be limited in its realization. Asserting this objection is also a procedural form of the respondent’s defence against the claimant, which it cannot be deprived of. In considering the defence of setoff asserted by the respondent as part of the examination of the justification for the principal claim, the arbitration court did not have to condition this examination on the existence of an arbitration clause in this respect.

4. The jurisdiction of the court considering a petition to set aside an arbitration award generally does not include review of the consistency of the award with substantive law or an examination of the correctness of the factual findings, other than a ruling based on a clearly selective and unobjective assessment of the evidence. Here, the grounds for the arbitration award are extensive, multifaceted and based on the indicated evidence, and explain the basis for the finding by the arbitration court that the claim for damages by the principal respondent asserted as a setoff to the claim of the principal claimant existed in the specified amount and the effectiveness of the setoff made, which resulted in denial of the principal claim. Examination of the justification for the petition is therefore not equivalent to substantive review of the award. Moreover, the appellant must remember that in deciding to submit the dispute for resolution by an arbitration court, it must be aware of both the positive and negative consequences. On one hand, the contracting parties are not exposed to the risk of lengthy proceedings, but on the other hand they waive certain procedural guarantees which apply in proceedings before the state court. Nor was there any barrier to the proceedings before the arbitration court being conducted in two instances (Civil Procedure Code Art. 1205 §2).

Data wydania: 15-01-2014 | Sygnatura: VI ACa 663/13

Key issues: arbitrator, arbitration agreement, arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20388

Łódź Court of Appeal judgment Dated 12 December 2013 Case No. I ACa 692/13

1. In a situation where the parties did not reach agreement on establishing the rules for the appellate proceedings and how they would be conducted, the arbitration court, in light of the parties’ intent clearly expressed in the arbitration clause, inconsistent with the rules in force at the arbitration court, should have either refused to accept the case for consideration or, pursuant to Civil Procedure Code Art. 1184 §2, conducted the appellate proceedings in the manner it saw fit.

2. In a situation of inconsistency between the arbitration agreement calling for two instances of arbitration proceedings and the rules of the arbitration court calling for one instance, priority should be accorded to the intention of the parties, and thus the arbitration clause. As the parties first mutually agreed on the rule of two instances before the arbitration court they selected, and second, failed only to agree on the rules for procedure at the second instance, the arbitration court was obligated to establish these rules itself.

3. As the parties referred to proceedings at two instances in the arbitration clause, failure to comply with this requirement by the arbitration court must be regarded as a violation of fundamental rules of procedure before the arbitration court (Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §1), resulting in granting the petition and setting aside the challenged award.

Data wydania: 12-12-2013 | Sygnatura: I ACa 692/13

Key issues: arbitration agreement, arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20404

Gdańsk Court of Appeal judgment dated 28 November 2013 Case No. I ACa 550/13

1. The view cannot be shared that in connection with the dispute that had arisen the contractor should have brought about the appointment of a dispute adjudication board and presented the dispute to it, and the consequence of failure to take such actions is the loss of the possibility of effectively pursuing the claim. The section [of the FIDIC contract conditions] on Claims, Disputes and Arbitration does not provide for such sanctions.

2. In proceedings before the arbitration court the arbitrators are not bound by decisions of the [FIDIC] dispute adjudication board, whose decisions should be treated as evidence in the case. The decision by the dispute adjudication board cannot be treated analogously to an arbitration award, nor is the proceeding before the board a part of the proceeding before the arbitration court.

3. The contracting entity was properly informed of the need to perform additional works and did not dispute the need to perform them. It thus may not effectively allege that payment for such works violates fundamental principles of the legal order because public monies were involved in financing the works.

Data wydania: 28-11-2013 | Sygnatura: I ACa 550/13

Key issues: arbitration procedure, jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20396

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 28 November 2013 Case No. IV CSK 187/13

1. Because an arbitration award may be set aside only for grounds set forth in the law which are generally considered at the court’s own motion, while, with the exception of the invalidity of the proceedings before the court of second instance, a cassation appeal is considered within the bounds of the grounds stated for the cassation appeal, a cassation appeal in a proceeding seeking to set aside an arbitration award may — apart from the instance of invalidity of the proceedings before the court of second instance — be granted only if one of the grounds asserted in the cassation appeal is upheld containing an allegation which justifies or may justify a finding of grounds for setting aside the arbitration award asserted in the petition to set aside the award or considered at the court’s own motion.

2. The separate listing of the circumstances [in Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 § 1 (2), (4) and (5)] as grounds for setting aside an arbitration award leads to the conclusion that they are excluded from the scope of application of the public policy clause.

3. For the arbitration court to conduct the proceeding ignoring the proffer of evidence, when the party has not given up introduction of the evidence and the evidence was necessary for resolution of the case, will constitute a violation of [the second sentence of Civil Procedure Code Art. 1183], setting forth one of the fundamental principles of arbitration procedure.

Data wydania: 28-11-2013 | Sygnatura: IV CSK 187/13

Key issues: arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20158

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 11 October 2013 Case No. I CSK 769/12

1. Participation in a judicial proceeding by entities lacking judicial capacity would result in the invalidity of the proceeding, while issuance of an arbitration award with respect to such entities would be regarded as a violation of the fundamental principles of the legal order of the Republic of Poland, because it would violate one of the fundamental procedural rules that only a party vested with judicial capacity can be a party to proceedings. Moreover, such an award would also violate the fundamental principle of civil law that only entities vested with legal capacity can be the subject of civil-law rights and obligations.

2. If a party raises the objection that the arbitration court lacks jurisdiction or the objection that a demand asserted by the opposing party exceeds the bounds of the arbitration clause (Civil Procedure Code Art. 1180 §2), and the arbitration court deems these objections unfounded, the arbitration court may issue an award, stating therein that it deemed the objections raised to be unfounded, or overrule the objections in a separate order. In the first instance, the correctness of the position of the arbitration court on the objection raised by the party may be reviewed in a petition to set aside the arbitration award. However, if the arbitration court issues an order overruling the objection, review of the correctness of this position by the state court may occur only under the procedure provided for in Civil Procedure Code Art. 1180 §3, i.e. by the party who raised the objection applying to the state court for a ruling within two weeks after service of the order on the party. The party’s failure to initiate such procedure for review of the order issued by the arbitration court deprives the party of the possibility of effectively basing a petition to set aside the arbitration award on the same objections constituting grounds for a petition to set aside an arbitration award under Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §1 (1) and (3).

3. The arbitration court’s violation of regulations of law, even regulations that are mandatorily applicable, does not necessarily mean violation of fundamental principles of the legal order, even if the arbitration court resolves the dispute according to the law governing the given relationship, when under Civil Procedure Code Art. 1194 §1 the parties did not authorize it to decide on the basis of general principles of law or equity.

4. The intervention by the arbitration court with respect to the demand presented concerned … the method of fulfilment of the performance demanded. In procedural law there are no more specific rules of a fundamental nature referring to ruling on the manner of fulfilling the performance demanded in the statement of claim by several persons. The case law permits a certain intervention by the court here, e.g. awarding the demanded amount in solidum instead of jointly and severally, and vice versa. … From the point of view of the principle that it is up to the parties to frame their demands [dyspozytywność] it is essential that the identity of the subject of the demand be maintained, and the scope and factual grounds justifying upholding the demand. With respect to the demand that was asserted, the arbitration award maintained the identity of the debtor and the creditor, the type of relief, its amount and indivisibility, and also the factual grounds justifying granting the relief.

5. The essence of this agreement [a consortium] is at least similar to the agreement of an ordinary partnership [spółka cywilna], and sometimes contains the essential elements thereof, which justifies application of the regulations governing ordinary partnerships as relevant to the relations between members of the consortium, including the regulations concerning joint commonality [wspólność łączna]. … It does not violate the public policy clause for the arbitration court to award damages to three entities “jointly” despite the lack of a legal relationship among these entities creating joint commonality among them.

6. The arbitration court’s ruling on the basis of the regulations of applicable law, if the parties do not provide otherwise (Civil Procedure Code Art. 1194 §1), is one of the fundamental principles of procedure before the arbitration court. Therefore violation of this principle by the arbitration court may be asserted as an allegation of violation of Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §1(4). Under this allegation, however, the state court cannot be expected to review the substantive correctness of the award issued by the arbitration court.

7. The position that suffering injury as a result of non-performance or improper performance of an obligation arising out of a contract does not justify wilful satisfaction of the claim for damages out of the established security, contrary to the conditions agreed with the counterparty, does not violate fundamental principles of the legal order, i.e. the principles of the rule of law (Constitution Art. 2), protection of property rights and equality of counterparties cooperating with one another (Constitution Art. 20), economic liberty (Constitution Art. 22), and equality before the law (Constitution Art. 32(2)).

Data wydania: 11-10-2013 | Sygnatura: I CSK 769/12

Key issues: arbitration agreement, arbitration procedure, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20394

Kraków Court of Appeal order dated 24 September 2013 Case No. I ACz 1427/13

1. The mere filing of a petition to set aside an arbitration award (Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §1) is not a barrier to issuance of an [enforcement] clause under Civil Procedure Code Art. 1214, but may lead to postponement of consideration of the case seeking enforcement by way of issuance of an [enforcement] clause (Civil Procedure Code Art. 1216 §1). Similarly, issuance of an enforcement clause for an arbitration award is not a barrier to subsequent setting aside of the award through a petition, as under Civil Procedure Code Art. 1210 the court in closed session may stay enforcement of the arbitration award.

2. In a proceeding for recognition or enforcement of an arbitration award, the subject of examination is not the correctness of the claim or the substantive basis for its existence, or formal issues concerning the course of the arbitration proceeding. But this does not mean that the proceeding on the petition to set aside the arbitration award is a predicate in relation to the proceeding for recognition or enforcement of the arbitration award. On the contrary, both of these proceedings are independent of one another and based on different grounds. If the proceedings on the petition to set aside the arbitration award and on the application for recognition or enforcement of the award coincide, the consequences of this coincidence for the latter proceeding are governed by Civil Procedure Code Art. 1216.

3. The fact of issuance of an enforcement clause by the state court for a ruling by an arbitration court does not affect in any way the ability to file a petition to set aside the arbitration award. After all, stay of enforcement of the arbitration award as a result of filing of the petition to set aside the award may occur if and only if the award was also held to be enforceable under Civil Procedure Code Art. 1212 and following. Before that the arbitration award does not have legal force and is not subject to enforcement. … Therefore, considering that both proceedings are regulated in Part Five of the Civil Procedure Code, and the legal situation of the coincidence of the two proceedings, application of Civil Procedure Code Art. 177 §1(1) should be approached cautiously, as pursuant to Civil Procedure Code Art. 13 §2 this provision is applicable to both of these proceedings only by analogy.

Data wydania: 24-09-2013 | Sygnatura: I ACz 1427/13

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award

id: 20410

Warsaw Court of Appeal judgment dated 13 May 2013 Case No. I ACa 1298/12

1. The proceeding on a petition to set aside an arbitration award is not a “review” proceeding, by instances, of a state court. No ordinary means of appeal lies against an arbitration award, but only a petition to set aside the arbitration award. Such petition, as stressed in the literature, is not a means of appeal but an extraordinary means of judicial oversight by the state court of the activity of the arbitration court.

 2. It does not appear warranted to conclude from the wording of Art. 1213 of the Civil Procedure Code (referring to a proceeding for recognition or enforcement of an arbitration award) that it is necessary to present the original of the [arbitration agreement] or a certified copy thereof in the arbitration proceeding. This is primarily because it would extend the grounds for the petition under Art. 1206 of the Civil Procedure Code.

3. Art. 1197 §§ 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code should be read together, meaning that the arbitration award must contain both the operative wording and the grounds, as necessary elements; the award must be signed and then served on the parties (Civil Procedure Code Art. 1197 §4).

4. Violation of the public policy clause must refer to the operative wording of [the award], which will function in legal circulation, and not to the level of the grounds.

5. Only if the state court finds that the [evidentiary] procedure was not conducted at all, or was conducted incompletely, or in an obviously defective way, violating principles of logical reasoning connecting facts in a chain of cause and effect, selective admission of evidence in the case, admitting evidence only from one party, unjustifiably ignoring evidence submitted by the opposing party, and the like, can it be found that the requirements referred to in Art. 1206 §1(4) of the Civil Procedure Code were not met.

Data wydania: 13-05-2013 | Sygnatura: I ACa 1298/12

Key issues: arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20429

Warsaw Court of Appeal judgment dated 11 April 2013 Case No. I ACa 1223/12

There is a great deal of autonomy in arbitration procedure, entirely consistent with the intentions of the Parliament, distinctly limiting the possibilities for review by the state court. The basic goal of this law is the speed of the procedure for resolving civil disputes, and not creation of an additional phase of pre-litigation proceedings. Parties deciding to submit a dispute to an arbitration court must count on these conditions, including minimal external review of its awards. The jurisdiction of the court considering a petition to set aside an arbitration award generally does not include review of the consistency of the award with substantive law or the correctness of the factual findings, apart from a ruling based on an obviously selective, unfair evaluation of the evidence.

Data wydania: 11-04-2013 | Sygnatura: I ACa 1223/12

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20420

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 27 March 2013 V CSK 222/12

1. The regulations of the Civil Procedure Code governing arbitration are not uniform in character. The provisions governing issues involving the permissibility of a petition to set aside an award and the formal requirements and procedure for the petition are strictly procedural in nature, but the provisions setting forth the grounds for the petition, constituting the basis for the court’s ruling on the merits of the dispute and the justification for the petition, are the functional equivalent of provisions of substantive law.

2. Assertion of new grounds for the petition to set aside an arbitration award after the deadline for filing of the petition is impermissible. … The court ruling on a case seeking to set aside an arbitration award may not consider on its own motion the ground set forth in Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §1(1) which was not asserted in the petition and was precluded.

3. Recognizing as binding an agreement which does not specify the essential terms of the contract would be irreconcilable with the fundamental principles of the legal order of the Republic of Poland.

Data wydania: 27-03-2013 | Sygnatura: V CSK 222/12

Key issues: arbitration agreement, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20268

Szczecin Court of Appeal judgment Dated 21 March 2013 Case No. I ACa 855/12

1. Even though (if the parties did not agree otherwise) the arbitral tribunal shall resolve a dispute applying the regulations of substantive law applicable to the legal relationship, violation of substantive law by the arbitral tribunal is grounds for a petition to set aside the award only if as a result of the violation, the award is contrary to fundamental principles of the legal order of the Republic of Poland. In other words, if despite a violation of substantive law the award cannot be said to be contrary to fundamental principles of the legal order, the mere violation cannot constitute an effective basis for demanding that the award be set aside.

2. The construction of a petition to set aside an arbitration award indicates that this measure is not used to conduct substantive review by the state court of the correctness of the resolution by the arbitral tribunal, similar to appellate review in judicial proceedings.

3. An award is contrary to fundamental principles of the legal order when this concerns constitutional principles of the socio-economic system or leading principles governing specific fields of substantive law. The fundamental principles of the legal order constituting the basis for evaluation of an arbitration award should be understood not only as constitutional norms, but also the leading norms in specific fields of law. … The procedural legal order may be the basis for evaluation of an arbitration award in two aspects. First, the compliance of the procedure which led to issuance of the arbitration award with fundamental procedural principles of the legal order is subject to evaluation. Second, the consequences of the arbitration award from the point of view of their compliance with the procedural public order are subject to evaluation, i.e., whether they are reconcilable with the system of procedural law, e.g. whether they violate res judicata or the rights of third parties.

4. A party forfeits the right to challenge an arbitration award through a petition to set aside the award due to failure to raise objections to an arbitrator subject, in the party’s view, to removal, if the party did not demand removal in the proceeding before the arbitral tribunal.

5. The requirements established for persons serving as arbitrator should be combined with the entitlement of a party to the proceeding to obtain knowledge about any potential ties between the arbitrator and the entities appearing in the proceeding. Generally it is left to the party to evaluate whether the circumstances constitute grounds for a decision whether to select an arbitrator or a decision to challenge the arbitrator. In this sense, the arbitrator’s own assessment is irrelevant, as the essence of the fairness of the procedure is connected with external evaluations made by others.

6. Indeed, the right to a fair trial provided in Art. 45(1) of the Polish Constitution, an element of which is consideration of the case by an independent court in a fairly conducted proceeding, does fall within the fundamental principles of the legal order whose violation the state court must examine at its own initiative. However, it is indicated in the case law and the legal literature that Art. 45 of the Constitution does not apply at all to arbitration, only the state courts.

7. The institution of recusal of a judge is provided for by the Civil Procedure Code both in proceedings before the state court and in proceedings before an arbitration court. The fundamental difference in the regulation of this institution is that in a proceeding before an arbitration court, the code does not provide for removal of the arbitrator or presiding arbitrator by operation of law, as is the case with respect to a judge in proceedings before the state court (Civil Procedure Code Art. 48). The grounds for challenging an arbitrator indicated in Civil Procedure Code Art. 1174 §2 are circumstances raising justified doubts as to his impartiality or independence, as well as lack of qualifications specified in the parties’ agreement. The grounds for recusal of a judge listed in Art. 48 and 49 do not apply to challenge of an arbitrator, but in interpreting the concept of circumstances raising justified doubts as to impartiality or independence Art. 48 and 49 may have auxiliary application. In a proceeding before a state court, under Civil Procedure Code Art. 379(4), participation by a judge recused by operation of law becomes grounds for the invalidity of the proceeding and constitutes grounds to vacate the judgment by the appellate court, as well as by the Supreme Court, and this ground shall be considered by both of these courts at their own initiative (Civil Procedure Code Art. 378 §2 and 39311). … The Civil Procedure Code does not provide for such absolute invalidity in proceedings before an arbitration court. If a party did not challenge an arbitrator or presiding arbitrator despite possessing knowledge of the grounds for challenge, there are no legal grounds to challenge the arbitration award. As an exception only, participation in an arbitration panel by an arbitrator or presiding arbitrator whose rights and obligations could be affected by the result in the case could constitute grounds for setting aside the award, which did not occur in this case. This is because violation of the principle that no one can be a judge in his own case (nemo in re sua judex) would undoubtedly conflict with the fundamental principles of the legal order of the Republic of Poland.

Data wydania: 21-03-2013 | Sygnatura: I ACa 855/12

Key issues: arbitrator, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20405

Warsaw Court of Appeal judgment dated 25 January 2013 Case No. I ACa 374/12

1. A proceeding on a petition to set aside an arbitration award is not an appellate review proceeding by the state court. No ordinary means of appeal lies against an arbitration award, but only a petition to set aside the award. As stressed in the legal literature, such a petition is not an appellate measure but an extraordinary means of judicial oversight by the state court over the activity of the arbitration court. This has the fundamental consequence that the state court generally does not examine the resolution by the arbitration court, and in particular does not review whether it is founded on the facts cited in the justification for the award, or whether the appropriate provisions of substantive law were applied. The state court may set aside an arbitration award only in exceptional instances, indicated in narrowly interpreted provisions of the code. Consequently, in the event of doubt the award should be upheld rather than set aside.

2. In examining the grounds and conditions set forth in Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §1(4), what is essential is failure to comply with the requirements for the fundamental rules of procedure before the [arbitration] court arising out of statute or specified by the parties. Such rules include basing the award on the established state of facts, which occurs after considering evidence.

3. The judicial discretion (of the arbitration court) in evaluating the relevance of specific evidence or allegations for making factual findings and issuing a ruling is appropriately broader than that referred to in Civil Procedure Code Art. 233 §1, and the state court “reviews” it only in terms of the “fundamental principles” of procedure before the arbitration court. Thus only if the state court finds that such procedure was not conducted at all or was conducted incompletely, or was obviously conducted defectively, violating the rules of logical understanding, connecting of facts in a chain of cause and effect, selective admission of evidence in the case, taking evidence only from one party, unjustifiably ignoring evidence offered by the opposing party, and so on, can it be found that the requirements referred to in Civil Procedure Art. 1206 §1(4) were not met. The cited provision should be interpreted narrowly, limiting the possibility of setting aside an arbitration award to the principles of a fair trial and procedural violations which could have had an impact on the arbitration award.

4. Violation of substantive law may be grounds for setting aside an arbitration award only when the substance of the award violates fundamental principles of the legal order. It should be borne in mind that the arbitration court is not bound not only by civil procedure regulations (Civil Procedure Code Art. 1184 §2), but also regulations of substantive civil law.

5. The rules establishing the obligation to pay damages may be regarded as comprising one of the fundamental principles of the legal order in the state; in other words, if anyone suffers an injury and the grounds for liability under any of the civil liability regimes are met, then within the bounds provided by law (Civil Code Art. 361 §§ 1 and 2) damages should be awarded against the person responsible.

Data wydania: 25-01-2013 | Sygnatura: I ACa 374/12

Key issues: arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20422

Katowice Court of Appeal judgment dated 30 October 2012 Case I ACa 634/12

In assessing the factual situation in terms of error, it cannot be accepted that the arbitral tribunal committed a violation of the constitutional principle of economic freedom (Polish Constitution Art. 20) or the constitutional principle that courts are bound by statute (Polish Constitution Art. 178(1)).

Data wydania: 30-10-2012 | Sygnatura: I ACa 634/12

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20424

Warsaw Court of Appeal judgment dated 23 August 2012 Case nos. I ACa 46/11 and I ACa 578/12

1. Review of an arbitration award by the state court cannot turn into a full consideration of the merits of the dispute submitted to arbitration for resolution. Nonetheless, the obligation to examine whether the challenged award violates fundamental principles of the legal order usually cannot be conducted properly without the state court’s reference to the case file. Sticking only to the wording of the arbitration award itself would render such review illusory.

2. Unlike the state court, the arbitration court is not bound to apply the law strictly, even if the parties have not authorized it to resolve the dispute under principles of equity. The only limitation on the arbitration court in this respect is the fundamental principles of the legal order (for example the principle of the compensatory nature of liability in damages and the principle of protection of property rights). Not every violation of substantive law by an arbitration court, nor every erroneous interpretation or improper application or failure to apply a legal norm may be held to be a violation of fundamental principles of the legal order.

3. The rule expressed in Civil Code Art. 379 §1 of the separateness of performance is not one of the rules whose violation would conflict with the foundations of the legal order of the Republic of Poland. It suffices to point out that the parties to the agreement may exclude this rule by providing for solidarity among the creditors (Civil Code Art. 369 in connection with Art. 367 §1).

4. An objection of the lack of jurisdiction of the arbitration court is subject to preclusion if it is not asserted within the time indicated in Civil Procedure Code Art. 1180 §2. In that case, a petition to set aside the arbitration award can no longer effectively rely on the basis set forth in Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §1(1). In the event of assertion of the objection of lack of jurisdiction, the arbitration court may rule on its own jurisdiction in a separate order, but that is left to its discretion. If the arbitration court is convinced of the existence of a valid arbitration agreement, it may also consider the case on the merits without first issuing an order concerning the asserted objections to its jurisdiction. In the latter case, it is obvious that a party may base its petition to set aside the arbitration award on the allegation of violation of Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §1(1), because it did not previously have any possibility of presenting this objection to the state court for its review. It is different in the case of issuance by the arbitration court of an order overruling the objection of its lack of jurisdiction. Then the parties may seek a ruling by the state court within 14 days after service of the order on them. The judicial proceedings in this respect are at two instances (Civil Procedure Code Art. 1180 §3).

5. A party which has exhausted the procedure specified in Civil Procedure Code Art. 1180 §3 cannot later, in a petition to set aside the award, again assert the objection of the absence of an arbitration agreement or its invalidity or ineffectiveness. This conclusion may be drawn from Civil Procedure Code Art. 365 §1 in connection with Art. 1207 §2 or in connection with Art. 13 §2. … Referring the order of the arbitration court to the court of first instance, and then the party’s failure to file an interlocutory appeal against an order against it, also closes the path to reassertion of the objection of the lack of jurisdiction of the arbitration court on the grounds indicated in Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §1(1). There are no grounds for distinguishing the litigation stance of a party which exhausted the recourse to both instances and a party which did not file an interlocutory appeal against the order of the court of first instance, and in consequence the order obtained finality. In both cases the legally final orders are binding on the parties and the courts pursuant to Civil Procedure Code Art. 365 §1.

6. A party that sought a ruling on jurisdiction pursuant to Civil Procedure Code Art. 1180 §3 and obtained an unfavourable order from the state court cannot assert the same objections under Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §1(1), regardless of whether the state court ruled at one or both instances.

7. The law essentially equalizes—in terms of legal consequences—the failure to assert the objection of lack of jurisdiction of the arbitration court within the time indicated in Civil Procedure Code Art. 1180 §2 with the respondent’s inclination (consent) to consideration of the case by the arbitration court. An interpretation accepting the preclusion specified in Art. 1180 §2 but at the same time permitting non-recourse to the procedure for judicial review set forth in Art. 1180 §3 and accepting the possibility of not disputing the jurisdictional order of the arbitration court until the petition to set aside the award would be an inconsistent interpretation and largely eliminate the benefits for both parties to the arbitration proceeding flowing from the 2005 amendment to the Civil Procedure Code.

8. In its review, the state court cannot re-evaluate the evidence to determine whether it would have made the same factual findings as those presented in the arbitration award under review. Disputing the arbitration award in this respect would be possibly only if the defects founds were so fundamental that they would qualify as a violation of fundamental principles of civil procedure. Evaluation of the award in terms of the fundamental principles of substantive law must not be turned into appellate review.

Data wydania: 23-08-2012 | Sygnatura: I ACa 46/11 and I ACa 578/12

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20403

Warsaw Regional Court judgment dated 19 July 2012 Case No. XXVI GC 516/12

1. A petition to set aside an arbitration award is a legal instrument combining the features of extraordinary means of review, i.e. a petition to reopen the proceedings, and a proceeding to determine a right or legal relationship. The petition is not a means leading to substantive consideration by the state court of the dispute resolved by the arbitration court.

2. Pursuant to §32(3) of the Rules [of the Court of Arbitration at the Polish Chamber of Commerce] signatures are placed on the ruling by the panel and by the President and the Secretary of the Court of Arbitration. This provision does not specify that it must be the Secretary’s personal signature, but only requires signing by the Secretary, and thus as well by his Deputy duly authorized for temporary performance of his duties. Interpreting this provision otherwise would lead to the absurd conclusion that the Court of Arbitration could not issue rulings at all during the temporary absence of the Secretary General due to illness or holiday.

3. It indisputably follows from §32(2) of the Rules [of the Court of Arbitration at the Polish Chamber of Commerce] that the ruling of the arbitration court consists of the resolution (operative wording) and the justification, which constitutes an integral part of the award. Similarly, Art. 1197 §2 of the Civil Procedure Code indicates that an arbitration award must contain the grounds for the resolution. Thus an award without such justification will not be introduced into legal circulation. Since that is the case, the resolution by itself would have no reason for being and for this reason the resolution and the justification should be treated as a formal and substantive whole. … Thus there are no reasons to deem the absence of the signatures of the arbitration panel under the operative wording of the award to mean the non-existence of the ruling and to raise arguments applicable only to the state courts.

4. The requirement to indicate an [arbitration] agreement in writing is also fulfilled when the party presents a certified copy of the document in which the agreement was concluded. A written copy in the form of a certified transcript from the document, i.e. the agreement, indicates that the original of the document constitutes a document referred to in Art. 1162 §1 of the Civil Procedure Code. The form of the [arbitration] agreement indicated by this provision means that the agreement must be made in writing. … Subsequent destruction or other loss of the document as the medium in which the agreement was recorded does not eliminate the relevance of the fact that it was previously made in written form. It should be indicated in this respect that the Parliament did not use the phrase “in written form” here but only “in writing,” which suggests that this may be any confirmation of the agreement made in writing, including a copy of the document containing the agreement, somehow referring to it in its content.

5. The state court considering a petition to set aside an arbitration award does not have the competence for a substantive assessment of the findings made by the arbitration court. This means that the state court cannot make its own findings on classification of an agreement, but can only assess the propriety, logical argumentation and conclusions dawn, and in this context confirm that it does or does not suffer from errors of logical reasoning.

Data wydania: 19-07-2012 | Sygnatura: XXVI GC 516/12

Key issues: arbitration agreement, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20430

Gdańsk Appellate Court order dated 29 June 2012 Case No. V ACz 450/12

1. Under the wording of Civil Procedure Code Art. 1158 §1, the court proper to hear a petition to set aside an arbitration award will be the court that would have been proper to hear the case if the parties had not made an arbitration clause. This rule should be understood to mean that any court could be proper, without any limitations, and thus proper based on general venue or alternative venue, at the election of the petitioner, of course under the condition that exercise of such election is possible at all in the given case.

2. Under Civil Procedure Code Art. 204 §2, a counterclaim is filed with the court of the main statement of claim, and thus it should be found that the election by the defendant (the petitioner) to file a counterclaim during the course of the proceeding before the arbitration court, and not a separate claim in a separate proceeding, determines its current litigation stance and means that the court proper to hear a petition to set aside the arbitration award will be the same court that would have been proper to hear the main
claim (Civil Procedure Code Art. 1158 §1 in connection with Art. 204 §2),
and not the court proper for a claim asserted … in a separate proceeding rather than as a counterclaim.

Data wydania: 29-06-2012 | Sygnatura: V ACz 450/12

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20372

Warsaw Appellate Court judgment dated 14 June 2012 Case No. I ACa 1241/11

1. The regional made an erroneous interpretation of Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §1(5) by incorrectly assuming that demonstration of the statutory ground for setting aside an arbitration award in the form of issuance of the award on the basis of a forged or altered document requires proof of this fact through a legally final conviction for commission of a criminal offence. The ground for setting aside an arbitration award consisting of the fact that the arbitration award was obtained through a criminal offence or that the basis for issuance of the award was a forged or altered document is the same as the basis for reopening a civil proceeding set forth in Civil Procedure Code Art. 403 §1(1). However, Art. 1206 §1(5) does not expressly require that the criminal act underlying obtaining of the arbitration award be established by a legally final criminal judgment, which means that such fact may be the subject of independent findings by the regional court.

2. There is great autonomy in arbitration procedure, entirely consistent with the legislative intent, significantly limiting the opportunities for review by the state court. The basic purpose of this legal regulation is to expedite the procedure for resolution of civil disputes, and not to create an additional phase of pre-judicial procedure. When the parties decide to submit a dispute to an arbitration court, they therefore must take into account such conditions, also including the minimal external review of its awards.

3. For the state court to conduct a proceeding concerning alteration of documents, which the petitioner did not attempt to demonstrate in the arbitration proceeding, would essentially involve the state court replacing the juridical activity of the arbitration court, which is not provided for by the civil procedure regulations.

4. Because the petitioner did not seek to correct or supplement the record [before the arbitration court], failure to exercise this special measure means that it lost the right to assert irregularities in preparation of such document. Pursuant to §13 of the Rules [of the Court of Arbitration at the Polish Chamber of Commerce in force from 1 January 2007], if the provisions of the Rules or the procedure agreed by the parties is not followed, a party who knew of such violation but failed to assert an objection promptly or within another time determined by the parties is deemed to waive the opportunity to raise such allegation in the proceeding before the arbitration court.

5. The limits of the discretion of the arbitration court in conducting the evidentiary procedure are established by the requirements of thorough examination of the circumstances essential to resolve the matter and equal treatment of the parties to the proceeding. Depriving a party of the opportunity to defend its rights should be interpreted narrowly. The arbitration court’s rejection of evidence offered by a party because it finds the evidence unnecessary does not constitute depriving the party of an opportunity of a defence.

Data wydania: 14-06-2012 | Sygnatura: I ACa 1241/11

Key issues: arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20274

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 13 April 2012 Case No. I CSK 416/11

1. The rule of the binding force of legally final judicial rulings, as an element of the values protected under the Constitution and in the international order making up a state governed by the rule of law, which the Republic of Poland is, is included among the fundamental principles of the legal order of the Republic of Poland.

2. The state judicial system and arbitration are not identical. The lack of identity does not mean, however, that arbitration courts, and particularly their rulings, are irrelevant for the judicial system. While it is true that under Art. 175 of the Constitution, justice is dispensed by the state courts, it should be clearly stressed that as part of the dispensation of justice, the state courts oversee the activity of arbitration courts, and more precisely the rulings issued by them.

3. A ruling by a state court on recognition or enforcement of an arbitration award results in ascribing to the award the same force that rulings of state courts have, which is clearly confirmed by Civil Procedure Code Art. 1212 §1. This means that such a ruling, thanks to the state court ruling connected with it, must be treated in legal dealings the same as any other ruling of a state court. ... If an arbitration ruling has the same force as a ruling of a state court, this means that Civil Procedure Code Art. 365 §1 [i.e. preclusive effect] applies to it. Civil Procedure Code Art. 1212 does not provide for any exceptions from the equivalence of the effects of the arbitration court ruling to a state court ruling.

4. If the parties and the arbitration court appointed by them wish the ruling of the arbitration court to be equivalent in its effects to a state court ruling, they must take into consideration that the arbitration court has already ruled preclusively in the same matter between the same parties. If the prior ruling by the arbitration court has already been recognized or enforced by the state court, this has fundamental significance for the ability to recognize a further ruling issued between the same parties. A state court which is ruling on recognition or enforcement of a further ruling may not ignore the fact that the state court has already spoken on the same matter. In other words, the court will be bound by the ruling of the state court that recognized or enforced the prior arbitration court ruling.

5. It follows from Civil Procedure Code Art. 365 §1 that a court ruling on recognition of a second arbitration ruling, being bound by the prior ruling also by a state court, should not permit two rulings to be found in legal circulation which decided the same preclusive issue differently in the same matter between the same parties.

6. The lack of a basis to apply the regulations on a proceeding upon a petition to reopen [a legally final judgment] directly to assessment of an arbitration award, and on the other hand the lack in Polish law of a regulation for reopening a proceeding with respect to arbitration awards, cannot result in the unfettered discretion of an arbitration court in determining whether to take into consideration an earlier award in which a certain issue was already preclusively ruled on between the same parties. … If the arbitration court expects its award to be recognized, it should take into consideration the prior resolution of the preclusive issue in the award that was already recognized with legal finality by the state court. When examining the permissibility of a departure from this rule, the court in a proceeding to set aside an arbitration award may not rely on the mere assertion by the arbitration court that new facts or evidence has appeared in the case, but should determine, applying as relevant the criteria for assessment developed in the context of the legal regulations for reopening of a proceeding concluded in a legally final judgment, whether they are truly new facts and evidence, and whether the party could have asserted them in the prior proceeding.

Data wydania: 13-04-2012 | Sygnatura: I CSK 416/11

Key issues: arbitration procedure, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award

id: 20375

Wrocław Appellate Court order dated 30 March 2012 Case No. I ACz 547/12

1. Under Civil Procedure Code Art. 1158, the court proper to hear a case under a petition to set aside an arbitration award is the court that would be proper to hear the case if the parties had not made an arbitration clause. This would thus be the court indicated by the regulations on exclusive geographical jurisdiction, or if there are no grounds to apply such regulations, the regulations on general venue.

2. Assertion of alternative venue—even assuming that such possibility is permissible—must be made in the first pleading, i.e. the response to the petition [to set aside the arbitration award], under pain of loss of such option.

Data wydania: 30-03-2012 | Sygnatura: I ACz 547/12

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20337

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 15 March 2012 Case No. I CSK 286/11

1. Factual findings by the arbitration court are generally binding on the state court hearing a petition by a party dissatisfied with the resolution of the case by the arbitration court. The proceeding before the state court is not in the nature of the review proper to a common court of second instance, however, but is limited to the grounds expressly stated by the regulations, which are the permissible legal grounds for a petition to set aside an arbitration award (Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §§ 1 and 2).

2. Only if the state court finds that the [evidentiary] procedure was not conducted at all or was conducted incompletely, or was clearly conducted defectively, in violation of the rules of logical understanding and linking of facts in a chain of cause and effect, with selective admission of evidence in the case, admitting evidence only from one side, excluding without justification evidence offered by the opposing side, and the like, may it be found that the requirements referred to in Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §1(4) were not met. ... This provision should be interpreted narrowly, limiting the possibility of upsetting an arbitration award to the principles of a fair trial and procedural violations that could have an effect on the arbitration award.

3. The defendant’s argument that the principles of civil liability for injury do not belong to the fundamental principles of the legal order in Poland cannot be sustained. Under the civil law, and thus in private legal relationships, as a result of various events—particularly dangerous acts, acts arising out of commercial activity, vehicular traffic, as well as legal acts—the occurrence of injury is of universal dimensions and requires legal regulations guaranteeing liability in damages. Regulations in this respect belong to the fundamental norms of the law of obligations, and under tort liability and contractual liability may be regarded as forming some of the fundamental principles of the legal order of the state.

4. Art. 45 of the Polish Constitution does not refer at all to arbitration, but only to the state courts.

Data wydania: 15-03-2012 | Sygnatura: I CSK 286/11

Key issues: arbitration procedure, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20368

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 9 March 2012 Case No. I CSK 312/11

1. In the view of the appellant, it was allegedly deprived of the opportunity to defend its rights before the arbitration court (Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §1(2)) because the arbitration court upheld a claim as to liability which had never been raised. … As the appellant ... does not allege that it was stipulated otherwise between the parties, it may be assumed that under the rule set forth in Civil Procedure Code Art. 1188 §2 the arbitration court regarded the claim for damages set forth in a pleading as effectively asserted.

2. The principle of the equal rights of the parties was respected in the proceeding before the arbitration court, as each of the parties was provided an opportunity to present its position on the matter at each stage of the proceeding.

3. The public policy clause, like any general clause, is not precisely defined, which leaves great discretion to the court ruling on a specific case, but nonetheless, on the basis of this clause, the review of the constitutive elements of an arbitration award may not take on the dimensions proper to a review of the merits (correctness) of the award. ... The prohibition of a review of the merits (correctness) of an award is tied to the essence of application of the public policy clause. In applying the clause, the point is not to determine whether the award is consistent with all relevant mandatorily applicable regulations of law, but only to determine whether the award effected a result contrary to the fundamental principles of the domestic legal order.

4. The fundamental principles of the legal order are the fundamental constitutional rules concerning the socio-economic system and the overriding principles governing specific fields of substantive and procedural law. It has been recognized in the case law that such principles include economic freedom and the freedom of contract, ... the principle of the autonomy of the will of the parties and the equality of entities, ... and the principle of social justice.

5. Procedural public policy ... may be grounds for assessing an arbitration award in two aspects. First, the procedure which led to issuance of the arbitration award is assessed for its compliance with fundamental procedural principles of the legal order. Second, the effects of the arbitration award are assessed from the perspective of their consistency with procedural public policy, i.e. whether they are reconcilable with the system of procedural law, e.g. whether they violate the principle of res judicata or the rights of third parties.

Data wydania: 09-03-2012 | Sygnatura: I CSK 312/11

Key issues: arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20370

Wrocław Appellate Court judgment dated 8 February 2012 Case No. I ACa 26/12

1. An arbitration award may be said to be contrary to the fundamental principles of the legal order … only with respect to constitutional principles of the socio-economic system or the leading principles governing specific fields of substantive law.

2. The defectiveness of an arbitration award consisting of violation of fundamental principles of the legal order must appear from the wording of the ruling as such, and not from violation of the regulations for procedure before the arbitration court.

3. The fundamental principles of the legal order, constituting the basis for assessment of an arbitration award, should be understood to include not only constitutional norms, but also the leading norms in specific fields of law.

4. Consideration of a petition [to set aside an arbitration award] generally does not include a review of the consistency of the arbitration award with substantive law, a review of whether the award is supported by the facts cited in the justification for the award, or whether such facts were properly established, although of course a ruling based on a selective, unreliable assessment of the evidence does violate the rule of law.

Data wydania: 08-02-2012 | Sygnatura: I ACa 26/12

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20339

Warsaw Regional Court order dated 24 January 2012 Case No. VII Co 931/10

The applicant withdrew with prejudice the application for enforcement of a foreign arbitration award and issuance of an enforcement clause. ... The respondent consented to withdrawal of the application and discontinuance of the proceeding. ... It appears from the evidence that withdrawal of the application is not inconsistent with the law or principles of social coexistence and is not intended to circumvent the law.

Data wydania: 24-01-2012 | Sygnatura: VII Co 931/10

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award

id: 20366

Warsaw Appellate Court order dated 18 October 2011 Case No. I ACz 1627/11

1. Although the court ruling on an application for enforcement of an arbitration award is not bound in any respect by the ruling of the Vienna Commercial Court in the action to set aside the arbitration award, it must not be ignored that the New York Convention provides grounds for the domestic court deciding on enforcement of a foreign arbitration award to consider, upon application of a party, a ruling setting aside the arbitration award as grounds to refuse enforcement of the award.

2. If a proceeding to set aside or stay enforcement of an arbitration award is only pending, that does not justify refusal to issue or confirm the enforceability of the award, but may justify postponing a decision on the matter.

Data wydania: 18-10-2011 | Sygnatura: I ACz 1627/11

Key issues: New York Convention, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 20367

Warsaw Regional Court order dated 8 June 2011 Case No. XX GCo 79/10

Because the arbitration award was set aside, issuance of an order on recognition of the award became moot.

Data wydania: 08-06-2011 | Sygnatura: XX GCo 79/10

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award

id: 20365

Poznań Regional Court judgment dated 25 May 2011 Case No. IX GC 704/10

1. A petition to set aside an arbitration award is an extraordinary means of review of arbitration rulings by the state court. It is not an appeal, but combines the features of an extraordinary means of challenge with a claim to establish a right or legal relationship. But it cannot be agreed that it is a type of appeal or means of challenge.

2. The list of grounds for a petition to set aside an arbitration award provided in Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §§ 1 and 2 are exhaustive in nature; that is, the court may not set aside an arbitration award for reasons other than those set forth in this provision. It should nonetheless be pointed out that one of the grounds for the petition—the public policy clause—is in the nature of a general clause, which means that the list of circumstances which may justify setting aside an award is not closed.

3. Not every violation of the rules for procedure before the arbitration court established by the parties or arising under the code should result in setting aside an arbitration award. It is justified to accept by way of interpretation that the fundamental rules of procedure are those whose violation could have an effect on the result in the proceeding before the arbitration court in the specific case.

4. With respect to review of arbitration awards, the purpose of the public policy clause is to protect the national legal system against resolutions that are incompatible with the system. The resolution by the arbitration court, understood as an individual and concrete norm expressed in the arbitration award, as well as the method by which it was issued, is subject to assessment from the point of view of compatibility with the fundamental principles of the legal system.

5. The state court does not review the correctness of the arbitrators’ resolution, but it must examine and assess it in order to review the compatibility of the resolution with public policy. In other words, the state court should—at least insofar as the allegation of incompatibility [with public policy] arises—create a model of the ruling which in its opinion is correct, and then compare that to the arbitrators’ resolution, in order to determine whether the nature and scale of the inconsistency justifies the allegation of violation of public policy.

6. A gross and obvious discrepancy between the facts appearing from the arbitration case file (or facts that are commonly known or known to the state court in its official capacity) and the facts assumed as the basis for the award may not remain entirely beyond the scope of interest of the state court.

7. In the meaning of consistency with the fundamental principles of the legal system of the Republic of Poland, the point of the Parliament was not that a ruling be consistent with all regulations of Polish law, but only that there be consistency with the fundamental principles of the legal system of the Republic of Poland.

8. The principle of the enforceability of contracts belongs to the group of fundamental principles of the Polish legal system. It is not absolute in nature, however, and is subject to a number of statutory exceptions. One of them is Civil Code Art. 5, setting forth the notion of abuse of a subjective right.

9. The principle of estoppel (venire contra factum proprium) and the clean-hands doctrine are not counted among the fundamental principles of arbitration court procedure and are not recognized as a part of the legal system of the Republic of Poland.

10. The rule of impartiality leads the arbitrators to maintain an impartial attitude toward the case and the participants in the proceeding. In turn, the formal equality of the parties is manifest in the right to be heard and equal procedural measures. The principle of equality in the proceeding before the arbitration court has two aspects: hearing out the parties by the arbitration court, and the opportunity to present their allegations and evidence to support them (the opportunity to use the same procedural measures). The principle of directness requires that evidence be taken before the full panel of the arbitration court.

11. If no injury was caused, awarding damages should be regarded as inconsistent with the fundamental principles of the legal system of the Republic of Poland.

Data wydania: 25-05-2011 | Sygnatura: IX GC 704/10

Key issues: arbitration procedure, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20376

Polish Supreme Court order dated 20 May 2011 Case No. IV CZ 18/11

1. Final refusal to issue an order enforcing an arbitration award definitively eliminates the possibility of treating the award as equivalent to a state court judgment, and thus eliminates the result of the proceeding up to that point before the arbitration court.

2. Without doubt, the debtor has standing to file a petition to set aside an arbitration award. The creditor is deprived of such possibility, however. A party satisfied with the resolution may only commence a proceeding provided for in Civil Procedure Code Art. 1212 §2. In the situation of the creditor, the proceeding for recognition or enforcement of the award is the only procedure available to such entity for review of the propriety and legality of the determination by a domestic arbitration court.

3. The Civil Procedure Code provides for two forms of review of the rulings of the arbitration court. Alongside the proceeding for enforcement of the rbitration award is the petition to set aside the arbitration award. ... These are independent proceedings, based on independent grounds. ... From the point of view of the proceeding before the state court, the case is definitively ended only by the proceeding on the petition to set aside the arbitration award.

4. An order on recognition or enforcement of an arbitration award issued abroad—unlike an order on recognition or enforcement of a domestic arbitration award—is analogous to rulings issued in the main proceedings on the merits of the case.

5. A cassation appeal on recognition or enforcement of a domestic arbitration award is impermissible.

Data wydania: 20-05-2011 | Sygnatura: IV CZ 18/11

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 20355

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 11 March 2011 II CSK 385/10

1. Under Civil Procedure Code Art. 1162, the fact that a party to an arbitration clause has the status of a consumer is irrelevant.

2. An arbitration clause is subject to interpretation. Notwithstanding the essentially procedural nature of an arbitration clause, it should be interpreted in accordance with Civil Code Art. 65, applied by analogy, and thus, inter alia, in accordance with the directives requiring consideration of the intent of the parties to the agreement concerning the arbitration clause and its purpose.

3. Violation of the substantive law applicable to assessment of the relationship being resolved may lead to setting aside of an arbitration award only when the effects of the award, as determined by the content of the ruling, are contrary to the fundamental principles of the legal order.

4. The fundamental principles of the legal order of the Republic of Poland … include the constitutional principle of protection of property rights (Polish Constitution Art. 64(2)). By granting protection to one party to an agreement at the cost of the other, by awarding high consideration against the latter in favour of the other contracting party despite a clear lack of grounds therefor, the arbitration court violated this constitutional principle.

Data wydania: 11-03-2011 | Sygnatura: II CSK 385/10

Key issues: arbitration agreement, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20220

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 28 January 2011 (Case No. I CSK 231/10)

1. An arbitration court may rule on its own jurisdiction in a proceeding in which a claim has been filed (Civil Procedure Code Art. 1180 §1), including also in a separate order. In the regulations concerning procedure before the arbitration court, the Parliament did not provide a basis for issuance of an award dismissing a statement of claim commencing a proceeding before the arbitration court, including in a situation where the arbitration court finds that it has no jurisdiction to decide the dispute. It follows from these provisions that in instances indicated in Civil Procedure Code Art. 1190 §1, 1196 §1 and 1198, the arbitration court shall issue an order discontinuing the proceeding. It should thus be accepted that the arbitration court shall issue such an order also when, after beginning to receive evidence in the matter, it finds that the proceeding cannot continue because of the lack of an arbitration clause or the invalidity of such agreement. Conducting the proceeding and issuing an award then becomes impossible for a reason other than that stated in Civil Procedure Code Art. 1198 (1) and the beginning of (2).

2. The nature of a ruling issued by a court, including by an arbitration court, is decided by the substance of the ruling, and not the name or external form which the court gave to the ruling .... The ruling challenged by the claimant in the petition to set aside the arbitration award ... was not—contrary to the name used—an arbitration award, but in light of the nature of the determination made therein, an order.

3. An order discontinuing the proceedings before the arbitration court because of the lack of a valid arbitration clause, or an order dismissing the statement of claim for this reason, is a ruling ending the proceeding before the arbitration court, in which the court rules on its own lack of jurisdiction in the matter. While an order by the arbitration court in which the arbitration court denies a defence of the lack of the arbitration court’s jurisdiction may be challenged before the common court by either of the parties within two weeks (Civil Procedure Code Art. 1180 §3), the Parliament did not provide for the opportunity to challenge before the common court an order by the arbitration court in which the arbitration court rules that it lacks jurisdiction in the matter. Upon issuance of such ruling, a proceeding before the common courts is open to the parties interested in resolution of the dispute, and they may exercise their right of access to the courts in such proceeding.

4. A negative determination by the arbitration court as to its own jurisdiction in a matter is a final ruling and is not subject to review by the common court. A ruling by the arbitration court finding that it lacks jurisdiction in the matter may thus not be challenged by a petition to set aside an arbitration award as provided by Civil Procedure Code Art. 1205 ff.

Data wydania: 28-01-2011 | Sygnatura: I CSK 231/10

Key issues: arbitration agreement, arbitration procedure, jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20362

Rzeszów Court of Appeal judgment dated 28 October 2010 Case No. I ACa 304/10

1. The grounds for setting aside an arbitration award in the form of failure to comply with fundamental rules of procedure cannot be equated with the grounds set forth in Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §2(2) arising out of the public policy clause, and the latter constitute separate grounds for setting aside an award.

2. The mandatorily applicable Civil Procedure Code Art. 1197 §2 provides that the statement of the reasons which guided the arbitral tribunal in issuing the award constitutes an inseparable part of the award. The reasons stated essentially constitute an integral part of the award. … The reasons for the resolution included in the justification may also prove relevant for determining the binding force of the legally final award, and thus the bounds of its substantive legal finality, even though this generally involves the binding force of the operative wording of the award. The reasons for the resolution are also covered by res judicata in situations where they must be referred to in order to determine precisely the substance of the resolution.

Data wydania: 28-10-2010 | Sygnatura: I ACa 304/10

Key issues: arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20400

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 30 September 2010 (Case No. I CSK 342/10)

1. In a petition to set aside an arbitration award, review of the merits of the case decided by the arbitration court is excluded.

2. Fundamental principles of the legal order should be understood to mean not only fundamental principles of the social and political system, reflected in constitutional principles, but also the overriding principles governing specific fields of law. … Examples that have been held to be violations of the fundamental principles of the legal order within the meaning of Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §2(2) include violation of the principle of the autonomy of civil-law entities and the principle of economic liberty, awarding damages where no injury has been suffered, or accepting the effectiveness of setoff under conditions in which specific regulations exclude such possibility.

Data wydania: 30-09-2010 | Sygnatura: I CSK 342/10

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20363

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 9 September 2010 Case No. I CSK 535/09

1. A petition to set aside an arbitration award is an extraordinary means of review intended to set aside the award if at least one of the grounds exhaustively set forth in Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 is justified.

2. When considering a petition [to set aside an arbitration award], the state court is bound by the grounds alleged by the petitioner. Only two of the grounds set forth in Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §2 are considered on the court’s motion: the non-arbitrability if the dispute and inconsistency of the arbitration award with the fundamental principles of the legal order of the Republic of Poland.

3. The assessment of whether an arbitration award is contrary to fundamental principles of the legal order is addressed to the content of the award, and not the correctness of the procedure before the arbitration court or the composition of the panel. … An arbitration award may be set aside under the public policy clause if it is found that the results included in the content of the award are not consistent with a specific norm which is regarded as one of the fundamental principles of the legal order in force in Poland. ... These principles include not only constitutional norms, but also the overriding norms in specific fields of law.

4. The requirements made of persons serving as arbitrators should be combined with a party’s right to learn about any ties the arbitrator may have to entities appearing in the proceeding. It is up to the party to evaluate such circumstances as grounds for a decision to select an arbitrator or to seek removal of an arbitrator. The arbitrator’s self-assessment is irrelevant, because the essence of a fair procedure is tied to objective judgment by others. ... The fundamental principles of the legal order include the right to a court as provided in Art. 45(1) of the Polish Constitution, an element of which is a party’s right to have its case heard by an independent court, in a fairly conducted procedure.

Data wydania: 09-09-2010 | Sygnatura: I CSK 535/09

Key issues: arbitrator, arbitration procedure, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20331

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 14 May 2010 Case No. II CSK 592/09

The court hearing a petition to set aside an arbitration award does not reconsider the case in which the arbitration court issued the award. The review by the court in such case is limited only to an examination of whether the ground asserted in the petition, which may be one of the circumstances listed in Civil Procedure Code Art. 712 §1, exists, and the court will take into consideration at its own initiative only whether the arbitration award violates the rule of law or principles of social coexistence (Civil Procedure Code Art. 714). Not only the proceeding before the court of first instance, but also the proceeding before the court of second instance, is subject to these rules.

Data wydania: 14-05-2010 | Sygnatura: II CSK 592/09

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20333

Polish Supreme Court order dated 6 November 2009 Case No. I CSK 159/09

1. Whether a given ruling of a foreign court may be legally relevant cannot be determined in advance at the time of recognition. Thus it cannot be anticipated what effects the ruling might have or in what circumstances a given entity might rely on it in the future. Thus the petitioner is right in asserting that Civil Procedure Code Art. 1145 §1 does not provide grounds to refuse recognition of a ruling by a foreign court only because in the view of the court where recognition is sought it will not exert legal effects in Poland.

2. If the petitioner [seeking recognition] appeared as a party in a proceeding before an Austrian court, it not only has a legal interest to have standing in the recognition proceeding before the Polish court, but such interest also means that if the grounds set forth in Civil Procedure Code Art. 1146 do not exist, it may obtain recognition of the award as effective in Poland.

3. A ruling denying a petition to set aside an arbitration award, formally speaking, is a merits decision and not only procedural. Such rulings thus, as a rule, are capable of recognition. It should be pointed out, however, that the dispute between the parties on the merits was resolved by the arbitration court, acting on the basis of the intent of the parties as expressed in the arbitration clause. The judgment in a proceeding to set aside an arbitration award is therefore only a resolution with respect to the state’s exercise of oversight of arbitration rulings.

4. A judgment by a domestic court issued in a proceeding upon a petition to set aside an arbitration award must be taken into consideration in a proceeding seeking recognition of a foreign arbitration award only when permitted by the provisions governing such proceeding. As grounds for denial of recognition, the Civil Procedure Code and the New York Convention provide only for the court in the country deciding on recognition of a foreign arbitration award to consider, upon motion of a party, a judgment setting aside the arbitration award.

5. Given the specific nature of an arbitration award, which is issued based on the intent of the parties, and the function performed by a foreign court that denies a petition to set aside an arbitration award, there is no legal basis for recognition of such judgment by the foreign court, which essentially involves only oversight and not the merits. The connection between such judgment by a foreign court and the arbitration award, and thus the not entirely independent nature of the judgment, is primarily a barrier to treating the judgment as a ruling that may be recognized in Poland under Civil Procedure Code Art. 1145 §1.

Data wydania: 06-11-2009 | Sygnatura: I CSK 159/09

Key issues: New York Convention, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 20298

Polish Supreme Court order dated 23 September 2009 Case No. I CSK 121/09

1. A proceeding upon petition to set aside an arbitration award may ... be conducted even in the event of the absence of an arbitration clause, or invalidity or ineffectiveness of such clause, or if the clause is no longer in force under applicable law (Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §1(1)). The parties may demand that an arbitration award be set aside for these reasons.

2. The issue of loss of force of an [arbitration] clause, as with the issue of the non-existence, invalidity, ineffectiveness or unenforceability of the clause, may be examined in a proceeding upon a petition to set aside an arbitration award only if the petitioner asserts the relevant allegation. The rule applicable in a proceeding before a state court is that the court is bound by the grounds of the petition and the limits of the motions made by the parties. Only grounds indicated in Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §2 may be considered by the court on its own motion.

Data wydania: 23-09-2009 | Sygnatura: I CSK 121/09

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20323

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 3 September 2009 Case No. I CSK 53/09

1. The task of the state court considering a petition to set aside an arbitration award is to examine whether there is a basis for setting aside the award as set forth in the act. This generally does not extend to a review of the arbitration award’s compliance with substantive law, or a review of whether it is supported by the facts cited in the justification for the award or whether such facts were correctly established.

2. Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 sets forth an exhaustive list of the grounds for setting aside an arbitration award. As a rule, the court considering the petition is bound by the grounds alleged by the petitioner, and thus may set aside an arbitration award because of the existence of one of the grounds listed in Art. 1206 only if it was asserted in the petition. Only two of the grounds listed in Art. 1206 for setting aside an arbitration may be considered on the court’s own motion, whether or not asserted in the petition: if the dispute is non-arbitrable pursuant to statute (Art. 1206 §2(1)) or if the arbitration award is contrary to the principles of the legal order of the Republic of Poland (Art. 1206 §2(2)).

3. Under the public policy clause set forth in Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §2(2), an arbitration award is subject to being set aside if the effects determined by the wording of the award are incompatible with a specific norm that is held to be a fundamental principle of public policy.

4. Application by the arbitration court of the proper substantive law for resolution of a dispute, which it is generally required to do under Civil Procedure Code Art. 1194 §1, is thus subject to review by the state court considering a petition to set aside an arbitration award only insofar as application of such law is required by the public policy clause, which is considered by the court on its own motion.

Data wydania: 03-09-2009 | Sygnatura: I CSK 53/09

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20295

Szczecin Appellate Court judgment dated 27 May 2009 (Case No. I ACa 177/09)

1. By adopting an arbitration clause, the parties voluntarily restrict their own constitutional ... right to resort to the courts.... Matters are most often entrusted to arbitrators for resolution because of their specialized knowledge, e.g. in the field of construction (in construction cases) or concerning commercial practices (in matters related to international transactions), where specialized knowledge is more important than knowledge of the substantive legal norms of a given legal system. In cases of this type, the arbitrators’ legal intuition may be sufficient. In such instances, it should be accepted that the arbitration court is not bound by regulations of substantive law, given the nature of the matters submitted to the jurisdiction of the arbitration court.

2. Pursuant to Civil Procedure Code Art. 714, the court is bound by the grounds for the petition to set aside the arbitration award, and additionally will consider on its own motion whether the award violates the rule of law or good practice. The allegation that the arbitration award violates the rule of law essentially concerns the issue of the permissible scope of review of the determination by the arbitration court by the common courts. ... Such review authority does not concern the issue of the correctness of the determination in terms of compliance with substantive law, or compliance with procedural regulations. The only basis for such review may be aggravated violations, of particular seriousness and weight, such that they also constitute a violation of the rule of law. The grounds for setting aside an arbitration award are formal in nature, as it is impermissible to examine whether the arbitration court resolved the dispute correctly in factual and legal terms, but only whether there was a violation of the public policy clause.

3. Violation of the rule of law should be understood to mean an offence against fundamental legal institutions. A determination violating the rule of law would include one that offends overriding legal principles and is contrary to the commonly accepted legal order in force in the Republic of Poland. An arbitration award may violate the rule of law if it results in a determination violating the applicable principles of a state governed by the rule of law. It is essential in this respect that when considering the case and ruling, the arbitration court is not bound by provisions of substantive law, but only may not violate the applicable principles of a state governed by the rule of law.

4. There is no catalogue of fundamental principles of the legal order, but they must be inferred from the entirety of legal norms in force.

5. It is a general principle of civil law that damages are due only when the injured party has suffered a loss, the function of damages is to compensate for loss, and damages may not exceed the amount of the loss. It should thus be recognized that an arbitration award violates the public policy clause if the damages awarded do not correspond to the loss suffered.

6. In a situation where the parties failed to specify the rules of procedure, under Civil Procedure Code Art. 705 §2 the arbitration court will apply the rules of procedure it deems appropriate. It is generally not bound by the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code in this respect. For this reason as well, the arbitration court need not lay down a procedure in advance, i.e. at the outset of the proceeding. It may thus do so during the course of the proceeding, including by issuance of separate orders with respect to successive activities. This extensive discretion of the arbitration court is limited, however, by Civil Procedure Code Art. 705 §2, third sentence, by the requirement to thoroughly explore the circumstances necessary to resolve the case. It is clear in this respect that the arbitration court may not violate the principles of the rule of law or social coexistence.

7. The adversary principle, and the principle of the parties’ availability, also apply in a proceeding before an arbitration court, and such court may not omit a thorough exploration of the circumstances necessary to resolve the case. … The “inability to omit a thorough exploration of the circumstances of the case,” as referred to in Civil Procedure Code Art. 705 §2, third sentence, should be understood primarily as a duty to conduct the proceeding before the arbitration court in a manner that assures the parties themselves of the ability to present any allegations and evidence, and, as an aspect of the equal treatment of the parties, to address the allegations and evidence presented by the opposing side.

8. The fundamental principles in force under Polish law with respect to liability for loss caused by non-performance or improper performance of an obligation, as expressed by the Civil Code provisions concerning the effects of non-performance of obligations, are a duty to redress loss by the party to a contract that failed to perform or improperly performed its obligation, and, significantly, an ordinary causal relationship between the party’s action and the loss. The duty to redress loss in this respect may not be determined randomly or arbitrarily, but must correspond to the extent of the loss suffered (even if based on a consideration of all of the circumstances of the case), and default interest is due from the day following the date on which the debtor fell into delay. An arbitration award that was issued in violation of these principles is an award that violates the rule of law.

Data wydania: 27-05-2009 | Sygnatura: I ACa 177/09

Key issues: arbitration agreement, arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20342

Polish Supreme Court order dated 7 May 2009 Case No. IV CZ 41/09

Under [former] Civil Procedure Code Art. 715 applicable in this case, whose current counterpart is [former] Art. 1207 §2, a proceeding upon a petition ... to set aside an arbitration award should be governed by provisions concerning an adversarial proceeding at the first instance. Thus the provisions that should be applied include Civil Procedure Code Art. 23, which provides that in cases seeking delivery or return of property for lease or tenancy, the amount in dispute in the case of agreements for a definite period is the rent for the period in dispute, but no more than one year; and for agreements for an indefinite period, the rent for a period of three months.

Data wydania: 07-05-2009 | Sygnatura: IV CZ 41/09

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20264

Warsaw Appellate Court judgment dated 21 April 2009 Case No. VI ACa 1421/08

1. The provisions of the agreement do not contain an arbitration clause because they do not provide a dispute resolution function for the arbitration court. The essence of the institution of the arbitration clause is the limitation of the role of the state courts in resolving disputes arising out of the legal relationship identified by the parties. Such limitation consists of submission of the arbitration award to review by the state court through the institution of the petition to set aside the arbitration award under the grounds set forth exhaustively in the code.

2. The essence of the institution of the arbitration clause is submission of a dispute for resolution by the arbitration court. If the agreement does not provide a dispute resolution function for the arbitration court, such a clause does not constitute an arbitration clause.

Data wydania: 21-04-2009 | Sygnatura: VI ACa 1421/08

Key issues: arbitration agreement, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20371

Polish Supreme Court order dated 28 January 2009 Case No. IV CZ 107/08

1. The grounds for permissibility of a cassation appeal from a judgment in a case seeking to set aside an arbitration award are the same as those from other judgments by the court of second instance, except that classification of the case in this respect is a two-step process, in the sense that determination of the subject of the ruling and the appeal requires resort to the arbitration award. A cassation appeal is thus permissible in cases: 1) in which the subject of the ruling by the arbitration court was property/financial rights [majątkowe] of a value no less than that specified in Civil Procedure Code Art. 3982 §1 (unless the scope of the challenge to the arbitration award was for a lesser amount), and 2) in which the subject of the ruling by the arbitration court was (also) non-property/financial rights; the latter may now be the subject of an arbitration clause within the scope provided by Civil Procedure Code Art. 1157.

2. If a party moves to set aside an arbitration award in its entirety and the petition is denied in its entirety by the court, the subject of the appeal from the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance denying the appeal will be the same as the subject of the arbitration award.

Data wydania: 28-01-2009 | Sygnatura: IV CZ 107/08

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20259

Polish Supreme Court resolution dated 21 January 2009 Case No. III CZP 136/08

1. The provisions of the Civil Procedure Code governing arbitration are not all of the same nature, but are divided into two main groups. One set of provisions governs issues related to the permissibility of a petition [to set aside an award], the formal requirements for the petition and the course of the proceeding, and thus are strictly procedural provisions. The other set of provisions includes those specifying the grounds of a petition to set aside an arbitration award, functionally analogous to provisions of substantive law and setting forth the grounds for the substantive determination by the court on the merits of the dispute and the justification for the petition. The differentiation among provisions of the Civil Procedure Code concerning a petition to set aside an arbitration award is reflected by the fact that in the event of filing of a cassation appeal in such a case, allegations of violation by the court of provisions of the Civil Procedure Code governing the permissibility of a petition and the course of the proceeding on the petition should be asserted as part of the second basis for a cassation appeal, that is, violation of procedural regulations, while allegations with respect to the grounds of the petition should be asserted as part of the first basis for a cassation appeal, that is, violation of substantive law.

2. The provisions of the Civil Procedure Code governing the grounds for a petition to set aside an arbitration award should thus be treated as analogous to provisions of substantive law, which is also essential for interpretation of interim provisions. From the point of view of principles for interim law, provisions governing the grounds for a petition to set aside an arbitration award should be treated analogously to provisions of substantive law, and are thus subject to the interim rules for substantive law and not procedural law.

3. The literal wording of Art. 2 of the amending act should be understood to mean that the regulation refers only to provisions concerning arbitration that are strictly procedural in nature, and thus concern the proceeding in a case upon a petition [to set aside an arbitration award]. It does not include provisions specifying the grounds for the petition, which should be governed by interim rules for provisions of substantive law.

4. Where an arbitration award was issued under the prior regulations of the Civil Procedure Code, but the case seeking to set aside the award was commenced under a petition filed after entry into force of the amending act, under Art. 2 of the amending act the new provisions should apply to the proceeding pursuant to the petition with respect to permissibility of the petition and the course of the proceeding, but the grounds for the petition to set aside the arbitration award should be determined and assessed in accordance with the former provisions in force prior to 17 October 2005.

5. In a case pursuant to a petition to set aside an arbitration award issued prior to the effective date of the Act of 28 July 2005 Amending the Civil Procedure Code (Journal of Laws Dz.U. No. 178 item 1478), commenced after the effective date of the act, the prior regulations of the Civil Procedure Code apply to an allegation of lack or invalidity of an arbitration clause stated as the grounds for the petition. The petitioner may assert such grounds for the petition even if it did not raise such objection in the proceeding before the arbitration court.

6. The rule set forth in Civil Procedure Code Art. 712 §2 clearly demonstrates that the legislative intent was to limit preclusion to an objection of exceeding the scope of an arbitration clause, and the intent was not to introduce such preclusion for an objection of lack of an arbitration clause.

Data wydania: 21-01-2009 | Sygnatura: III CZP 136/08

Key issues: arbitration agreement, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20258

Warsaw Appellate Court judgment dated 14 January 2009 Case No. VI ACa 785/08

1. Violation by the arbitration court of regulations of substantive law or erroneous interpretation thereof, even if resulting in an erroneous ruling, does not in itself—even if it really did occur—constitute a violation of the fundamental principles of the legal system.

2. Civil Procedure Code Art. 1185 indicates that the consultation among the arbitrators may occur at any place (and thus even in a hospital).

3. Drawing up and signing the award is not an act that requires the preparation of minutes. As provided in §31 of the Rules [of the Court of Arbitration at the Polish Chamber of Commerce], minutes are prepared of a hearing and any act of the arbitration court. The mere physical drawing up of the text of the award is not an act of the arbitration court; it is a technical, auxiliary act, which may be performed by only one person at a time. Signing of the award, which is an act addressed to the members of the panel of arbitrators, should be analyzed similarly. Placement of a signature by each of the arbitrators is the act of the arbitrator alone, not of the panel of arbitrators. It thus does not require the preparation of minutes, which is reserved for an act of the entire arbitration court.

4. Only a violation of the “fundamental” rules of procedure before the arbitration court (Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §1(4)) may be grounds for setting aside an arbitration award. … Issues connected with drawing up the minutes of the consultation among the arbitrators and issuance of the award cannot be regarded as belonging to this group. Even if minutes of these actions actually should have been prepared, the lack thereof would not mean that a “fundamental” rule of procedure had been violated, but only a rule of order.

Data wydania: 14-01-2009 | Sygnatura: VI ACa 785/08

Key issues: arbitration procedure, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20348

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 7 January 2009 Case No. II CSK 397/08

1. An arbitration clause is an agreement which is governed by the Civil Code, including Art. 58 § 2. … Such agreement requires a specific power of attorney, and thus the power of attorney granted to the other partner—and that only to arrange banking formalities—was not sufficient for conclusion of an arbitration clause, and thus the clause was invalid.

2. It is clear from Civil Procedure Code Art. 714 that in a proceeding to set aside an arbitration award the court will consider on its own initiative only one of the grounds for the petition, namely that provided in Civil Procedure Code Art. 712 §1(4), i.e. whether the arbitration award violates the rule of law or principles of social coexistence. This means that all other grounds for the petition, including that there was no arbitration clause or that the clause was invalid or ceased to be in force (Art. 712 §1(1)), will be considered by the court only if they were asserted in the petition to set aside the arbitration award.

3. There is no catalogue of the rule of law, but such principles are shaped by the case law. Merits review of an arbitration award by the state court is thus limited to an assessment of whether the award violates such principles. ... This has to do with such violations of regulations of substantive law that result in violation of the principles of the rule of law, and the arbitration award violates the leading legal principles in force in the Republic of Poland, conflicts with the legal system, or violates the principles of the political and socio-economic order.

4. Conducting an evidentiary proceeding is intended to determine a state of facts, and it is not the task of the state court to conduct a new merits assessment of the correctness of the claims pursued before the arbitration court.

5. An arbitration award holding effective a setoff in violation of Civil Code Art. 505(1), or awarding damages in a situation in which no loss was suffered, violates the principles of the rule of law.

6. Whether the assessment by the arbitration court was correct is unreviewable by the state court, but without a doubt ruling on the basis of a selective, unobjective assessment of the evidence violates the principles of the rule of law.

Data wydania: 07-01-2009 | Sygnatura: II CSK 397/08

Key issues: arbitration agreement, arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20353

Warsaw Appellate Court judgment dated 10 December 2008 Case No. I ACa 655/08

1. While it is true that Civil Procedure Code Art. 697–711, in the wording in force through 16 October 2005, do not contain a provision that includes the content of Art. 1185, currently in force, which provides that the arbitrators’ deliberations may occur at any place, there should be no doubt that the arbitration court also had such authority under the regulations previously in force. … The arbitrators may meet for joint discussion, conduct a telephone conference, or consult with one another through an exchange of written correspondence.

2. An arbitrator’s duty to maintain confidentiality with respect to both the content and the course of the arbitrators’ deliberations is regarded as extremely important, which is why the view should be adopted, as stated in the literature, that the obligation to maintain confidentiality excludes an arbitrator from testifying before the court as to circumstances the arbitrator learned of while performing such function.

3. Under Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §1(2), a demand to set aside an arbitration award may be regarded as justified if the party demonstrates that it was deprived of the ability to defend its rights in the proceeding before the arbitration court. This provision refers to the necessity in the arbitration proceeding to observe requirements concerning the principle of the equality of the parties, hearing out the parties, and the ability for a party to address evidence and allegations presented by the opposing party. … The right to equal treatment of the parties extends further than the right to be heard. This principle requires the arbitration court more specifically to assure that the parties are treated equally during the course of the entire proceeding, which means identical treatment of the parties in a similar situation. The prohibition on discrimination against either of the parties applies to the entire proceeding before the arbitration court, but in practice it applies first and foremost to the evidentiary procedure.

4. It should be regarded as a violation of the principle of equal treatment of the parties to conduct an evidentiary procedure essentially limited to the evidence presented by the claimant, including all evidence from the testimony of witnesses, while at the same time refusing to hear the witnesses indicated by the respondent, in a situation where it clearly appears from the allegations of the respondent that the witnesses will testify as to circumstances highly relevant to resolution of the case.

5. In the arbitration clause, the parties are required to identify the subject of the dispute or the legal relationship out of which the dispute has arisen or may arise. Thus as the parties in the agreement submitted to the Court of Arbitration at the Polish Chamber of Commerce disputes arising in connection with the agreement, it should be found that they had in mind not any and all disputes that might exist between them, including disputes with respect to claims for unjust enrichment, but only disputes concerning claims arising on the basis of the agreement as concluded, that is, contractual claims.

Data wydania: 10-12-2008 | Sygnatura: I ACa 655/08

Key issues: arbitration agreement, arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20374

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 27 November 2008 Case No. IV CSK 292/08

1. A judicial proceeding to set aside an arbitration award should be conducted through to the end in accordance with the provisions in force upon commencement of the proceeding, that is, applying Civil Procedure Code Art. 165 §1, at the time of filing of the petition to set aside the award with the proper court. Thus if the petition was filed prior to 17 October 2005 [when the law was amended], the proceeding thereby initiated should be conducted thereafter in accordance with Civil Procedure Code Art. 712–715, but a proceeding commenced by a petition filed on that date or later, in accordance with Civil Procedure Code Art. 1205–1211. Similarly, a proceeding before an arbitration court should be conducted through to the end in accordance with provisions in force upon commencement of the proceeding. However, in light of the rule set forth in Civil Procedure Code Art. 1186, the date of commencement of a proceeding before an arbitration court will generally be the date of service on the respondent of the document containing the demand for arbitration.

2. In instances in which arbitrators are appointed by each party independently, a new arbitrator appointed by one of the parties has the same status as the former arbitrator. Since the former arbitrator was unable to reach agreement on selection of a super-arbitrator and it was necessary for the super-arbitrator to be appointed by the court, the decision of the court in this respect could hardly be questioned just because of the appearance of a new arbitrator. There is no need to assure him an influence over appointment of the super-arbitrator, since his predecessor with an analogous status failed to make use of his opportunity in this respect.

3. There may be various reasons for loss of force of an arbitration clause. In addition to the procedural grounds listed in Civil Procedure Code Art. 1168 (previously Art. 702 §1) and Art. 1195 §4 (previously Art. 707 §2), it could also involve such events as dissolution of the arbitration agreement, occurrence of a suspensory condition, or lapse of the deadline by which an arbitration award should have been issued. Termination of the agreement containing the clause does not in and of itself constitute such grounds, however. This rule is now stated clearly by Civil Procedure Code Art. 1180, but should not have been in doubt prior to adoption of that provision.

Data wydania: 27-11-2008 | Sygnatura: IV CSK 292/08

Key issues: arbitrator, arbitration agreement, arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20257

Poznań Appellate Court judgment dated 27 August 2008 (Case No. I ACa 568/08)

1. The provisions of the rules of the arbitration court cannot be relevant for determining whether the parties made an arbitration clause in accordance with the rules set forth in the Civil Procedure Code. ... In assessing the validity of an arbitration agreement as a legal act, the common court considers the circumstances resulting in invalidity of legal acts according to the regulations in force, that is, whether actions were taken without complying with requirements as to form provided for by statute or by the parties under pain of invalidity, and whether the substance of the action is contrary to or intended to circumvent a statute, or contrary to principles of social coexistence, and whether there were defects in the declarations of will.

2. A thorough analysis of the substantive justification of the determination by an arbitration court exceeds the bounds of a proceeding commenced upon a petition referred to in Civil Procedure Code Art. 1205 ff. ... The view is stated in the case law that determinations by an arbitration court are binding, and the common court has no right to conduct substantive review of a case concluded in a ruling of an arbitration court, apart from exceptions provided by statute.

Data wydania: 27-08-2008 | Sygnatura: I ACa 568/08

Key issues: arbitration agreement, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20338

Polish Supreme Court Order dated 9 July 2008 Case No. V CZ 42/08

There is a great deal of autonomy in arbitration procedure, entirely consistent with the intention of lawmakers, distinctly limiting the availability of review by the state court. The basic goal of this legal regulation is to expedite the procedure for resolving civil disputes, not create an additional phase of pre-judicial procedure. Parties who decide to submit a dispute to an arbitration court must thus count on such conditions, including also minimal external review of arbitration awards.

Data wydania: 09-07-2008 | Sygnatura: V CZ 42/08

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20251

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 11 June 2008 Case No. V CSK 8/08

1. Review of the merits of an arbitration award by the state court is limited to a determination of whether the award violates public policy. The phrase used by the Parliament, “fundamental principles of the legal order” (Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §2(2)), clearly demonstrates that this has to do with violation of provisions of substantive law that would infringe on the principles of the rule of law, and the arbitration award infringes the guiding legal principles in force in Poland, conflicts with the legal order in force, i.e. violates the principles of the political and socioeconomic system.

2. Redress of injury should be regarded as a fundamental principle of the legal order. Damages should clearly correspond to the injury.

3. Carrying out a legal act intended to circumvent the statutory prohibition on setoff of claims covered by an arrangement violates public policy.

Data wydania: 11-06-2008 | Sygnatura: V CSK 8/08

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20249

Warsaw Appellate Court judgment dated 25 April 2008 Case No. VI ACa 928/07

1. The schedule of fees for actions of the arbitration court constituting an annex to the rules of the court in force from 1 January 2000, which does not require payment of an arbitration fee on a defence of setoff, was applicable to the case decided by the arbitration court. … As the arbitration court failed to consider the defence of setoff because of failure to pay the arbitration fee, the allegation in the appeal that the procedure before the arbitration court was not observed in the arbitration proceeding is correct. … In consequence, it should be held that the petition to set aside the arbitration award on the basis of Civil Procedure Code Art. 712 §1(3) is justified by the wording of this provision.

2. Submission of the dispute existing between the parties for resolution by the arbitration court does not justify the conclusion that the parties waive the right to a fair and thorough procedure assuring the ability to satisfy the legal interests of the parties which are worthy of protection. The right to a fair procedure is a pillar of a democratic state governed by the rule of law, and for these reasons violation of such right justifies the conclusion that the rule of law was violated. This will be the case more specifically in the event of failure to consider the defence of setoff asserted by the party as a result of the arbitration court’s application of a regulation that was not in force with respect to payment of a fee as a condition for consideration of the motion. The principle of fair procedure requires consideration of the defence of setoff duly asserted by the respondent.

Data wydania: 25-04-2008 | Sygnatura: VI ACa 928/07

Key issues: arbitration procedure, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20347

Szczecin Appellate Court judgment dated 23 April 2008 (Case No. I ACa 204/07)

1. The issue of the scope of an arbitration clause involves interpretation of the declarations of will of the parties expressed in the document, where the main role is played by rules of linguistic meaning.

2. When considering a petition to set aside an arbitration award, the state court will examine the case only with respect to the grounds listed in Civil Procedure Code Art. 712 §§ 1 and 2. The ruling by the state court is limited in this case either to setting aside the arbitration award in whole or part, or denying the petition. ... The task of the court in a proceeding initiated by a petition to set aside an arbitration award is not to determine the merits of the matter that was previously resolved by the arbitration court, applying provisions of substantive and procedural law, but only to assess the justification for the petition under the grounds set forth in Civil Procedure Code Art. 712 §§ 1 and 2. The court with which a petition to set aside an arbitration award has been filed does not act as a court of second instance, authorized to review the merits of the case applying provisions of substantive law, but reviews the challenged award only from the perspective of the violations indicated in Civil Procedure Code Art. 712 §§ 1 and 2.

3. [Civil Procedure Code Art. 712 §1(2)] refers to the necessity to comply with the principle of the equality of the parties before the arbitration court, to hear them out, and the possibility for a party to address the evidence and allegations presented by the opposing party. As stated by the Supreme Court, only if the arbitration court did not hear the party at all or did not allow it to submit its allegations can it be said that the party was deprived of the opportunity to defend its rights.

4. Pursuant to the rule set forth in Civil Procedure Code Art. 705, in a proceeding before an arbitration court the parties have the right to establish the rules of procedure themselves. Their determination of the procedure may occur in the arbitration agreement or in an additional agreement, but no later than the time the proceeding is commenced. Lack of agreement by the parties means that the right to select the arbitration procedure passes to the arbitrators, as if they were assuming the rights of the parties.

5. A ruling by an arbitration court may not be challenged because of erroneous decision of the case in legal or factual terms. Violation of the law may be grounds for setting aside an arbitration award only if the content of the ruling violates the rule of law or principles of social coexistence. Assessment of whether the ruling violates the rule of law or principles of social coexistence is formulated narrowly, and such conclusion may be reached only if the arbitration award would result in a material violation of such principles.

Data wydania: 23-04-2008 | Sygnatura: I ACa 204/07

Key issues: arbitration agreement, arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20341

Warsaw Appellate Court judgment dated 16 April 2008 (Case No. I ACa 1334/07)

1. It should be borne in mind that the arbitration court, which is not bound by provisions on procedure before the court (Civil Procedure Code Art. 1184 §2), has greater discretion than in a civil proceeding shaped by the Civil Procedure Code.

2. The arbitration court ... took evidence on its own initiative from the review of the websites and a review of the search capabilities of the Google Internet search engine with respect to the words in dispute ..., without being requested to do by the parties to the proceeding and without citing specific circumstances of the case justifying such initiative by the court, but in the view of the Appellate Court this does not constitute a serious violation of the adversary principle.

3. Taking evidence not in compliance with the rules set forth in Civil Procedure Code Art. 235–237 ... is not equivalent to violation of fundamental rules of procedure within the meaning of Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §1(4), which limits the ability to set aside an arbitration award to the principles of a fair trial and procedural violations material enough that they could influence the arbitration award.

4. An arbitration award will also be set aside if the award is contrary to fundamental principles of the legal order of the Republic of Poland. … This does not have to do with internal inconsistency of the form of the ruling, i.e. inconsistency between the specific parts of the ruling. This provision, which is an exception to the rule that when considering a petition to set aside an arbitration award, the state court generally does not review the resolution by the arbitration court on the merits, and in particular does not review whether the award is founded on the facts cited in the justification or whether such facts were correctly determined (as it is undisputed that arbitrators should have greater discretion than a state court in interpreting and applying the law), restricts substantive review of arbitration court rulings only to instances of violation of the principles of the legal order, i.e. instances where the effects of the arbitration court ruling would cause a material violation of such principles, which should be understood to mean the principles of the political and socioeconomic system. This means that the state court proper to consider the petition may not consider the substantive side of the dispute..., and an allegation of violation of specific provisions of substantive law may be effective only insofar as the violation of specific norms also violates the principles of the legal order.

Data wydania: 16-04-2008 | Sygnatura: I ACa 1334/07

Key issues: arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20335

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 6 March 2008 Case No. I CSK 445/07

1. An allegation under Civil Procedure Code Art. 712 §1(2) refers to deprivation of a party’s right to a defence only before the arbitration court, and thus it could not serve in this respect as independent and effective grounds for a cassation appeal, which may involve a challenge to the correctness of the proceeding before the state appellate court, but not in an arbitration proceeding.

2. There is a consensus that the authority to review [a ruling of an arbitration court by a state court] does not involve the issue of the correctness of the ruling in terms of its compliance with substantive law, or compliance with procedural regulations. The basis for such review may only be an aggravated violated of particular importance and weight—of the sort that also constitutes a violation of the rule of law. By no means may such review turn into a form of appellate review of the merits.

3. A petition to set aside an arbitration award is in ... the nature of an extraordinary legal instrument based on very narrowly defined grounds, which do not include undue explanation of the circumstances necessary to resolve the matter. Thus it must be concluded that violation of Civil Procedure Code Art. 705 §2, third sentence, may also provide grounds for a petition under Civil Procedure Code Art. 712 §1(4) only when it is of an extreme nature, and thus when it takes the form of complete omission of an explanation of the circumstances of the case or ignoring the evidence as a whole.

4. An arbitration court may not take into consideration facts not cited by the parties, or presume that the claimant’s allegations are true if the claimant fails to appear at the hearing, or assume facts to be true if they are not denied.

Data wydania: 06-03-2008 | Sygnatura: I CSK 445/07

Key issues: arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20248

Polish Supreme Court resolution dated 4 January 2008 Case No. III CZP 113/07

1. The subject of a proceeding [upon a petition to set aside an arbitration award] is a petition through which a party challenges the ruling of an arbitration court. The state court does not reconsider the case that was submitted to the arbitration court for decision and does not review the correctness of the award in terms of its compliance with provisions of substantive law or the correctness of the factual findings serving as the basis for the ruling. The proceeding does not have to do with a claim to be tried in the sense of an adversary proceeding, but rather with setting aside an award determining a specific legal status between the parties, and the petition shall contain a justification of the statutory ground the existence of which will result in setting aside the arbitration award.

2. The legal nature of a petition to set aside an arbitration award, framed in this way, means that the claim submitted to the arbitration court for decision is irrelevant to the petition and to the proceeding commenced as a result of filing the petition. Beyond the issue of the jurisdiction of the court (Civil Procedure Code Art. 696), it is irrelevant whom the dispute is between and over what, whether the matter submitted to the arbitration court for decision is in the nature of a commercial case, or an employment case, within the meaning of the Civil Procedure Code, or whether, if the case had been filed in a proceeding before the state court, it would be heard in a proceeding for order of payment, or under a summary or simplified proceeding. In consequence, the claim which the arbitration court ruled on in the award being challenged cannot determine what regulations are applicable in the proceeding upon a petition to set aside the award.

3. Regulations concerning separate procedures in commercial cases do not apply in a proceeding upon petition to set aside an arbitration award.

Data wydania: 04-01-2008 | Sygnatura: III CZP 113/07

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20246

Polish Supreme Court order dated 29 November 2007 Case No. III CSK 176/07

1. Arbitration is a procedure for resolving civil disputes by a decision-making body that is not a state court, but its jurisdiction is based on an agreement of the parties. For this reason, Art. 45 of the Polish Constitution, which refers to state bodies of the justice system identified in Constitution Art. 175(1), does not apply directly to arbitration.

2. When considering a case, an arbitration court is not bound by general regulations of procedural law applicable in a judicial proceeding, if the parties or the arbitration court have not otherwise provided for the procedure.

3. The indication in the second sentence of Civil Procedure Code Art. 1184 §2 that an arbitration court is not bound by judicial procedure regulations does not refer to mandatorily applicable provisions of the Civil Procedure Code governing procedure before the arbitration court. … Unless otherwise agreed by the parties, the arbitration court may conduct the proceeding as it deems fit, but subject to the provisions of the act. The rule of the priority of the intent of the parties in establishing the arbitration procedure, under Civil Procedure Code Art. 1184 §1, is subject to a limitation in that their selected manner of proceeding before the arbitration court may not be contrary to provisions of the law of the state which they selected that are in force in such a proceeding. The wording of Art. 1184 §1 (“if not otherwise provided by the act”) means that the parties may not, by their intent, change or exclude such provisions, and thus they are regulations of mandatory applicability [juris cogentis].

4. A state court considering a case upon a petition to set aside an arbitration award does not decide the dispute between the parties, and thus does not assess whether the arbitration court decided the case correctly in factual or legal terms, but only examines it from the point of view of grounds to set aside the award set forth in Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206.

5. Violation by the arbitration court of rules and regulations of the Civil Procedure Code binding on it governing arbitration procedure may provide grounds for a petition to set aside the arbitration award on the basis of failure to comply with fundamental rules of procedure before such court, arising under the act referred to in Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §1(4).

Data wydania: 29-11-2007 | Sygnatura: III CSK 176/07

Key issues: arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20244

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 27 November 2007 Case No. IV CSK 239/07

1. The arbitration court’s “replacement” of the parties in submitting declarations of will to extend tenancy agreements must be regarded as an action contrary to the rule of law. This type of ruling, absent a very clear contractual provision authorizing a ruling in this respect, conflicts with one of the fundamental principles of civil law: the principle of the autonomy of persons under the civil law, and included therein, the principle of freedom of contract.

2. Violation of the rule of law need not ... involve violation of principles arising under the Polish Constitution. The same result occurs if the arbitration court violates a fundamental principle of civil law.

3. Issuance of an enforcement clause for an arbitration award or confirmation of its effectiveness does not exclude the possibility to review whether the award violates the rule of law or principles of social coexistence in a proceeding to set aside the award.

Data wydania: 27-11-2007 | Sygnatura: IV CSK 239/07

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20243

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 19 October 2007 Case No. V CSK 181/07

1. It is accepted in the literature and in the precedent that res judicata effect, governed by Civil Procedure Code Art. 366, is ascribed only to rulings on the merits. … An order dismissing a petition to set aside an arbitration award, which does not belong to the category of listed merits determinations, does not enjoy res judicata effect and cannot justify an allegation of the invalidity of the proceeding based on Civil Procedure Code Art. 379(3).

2. Given that the petition to set aside the arbitration award was not based on Civil Procedure Code Art. 712 §1(1), it was impermissible for the court to consider sua sponte the issue of the invalidity of the arbitration clause.

Data wydania: 19-10-2007 | Sygnatura: V CSK 181/07

Key issues: arbitration agreement, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20242

Polish Supreme Court order dated 12 October 2007 Case No. V CZ 91/07

1. Under Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206, in a case seeking to set aside an arbitration award, the court’s jurisdiction leads to consideration of the petition within the grounds asserted by the petitioner (which may be the circumstances listed in Art. 1206 §1), and beyond that, as provided in Art. 1206 §2, the court will set aside an arbitration award only if it finds that 1) under the law, the dispute may not be resolved by an arbitration court, or 2) the arbitration award is contrary to fundamental principles of the legal order of the Republic of Poland (the public policy clause).

2. The grounds for a petition to renew a proceeding to set aside an arbitration award may concern only this proceeding and no other proceeding, and more specifically may not apply to a proceeding for enforcement of an arbitration award and issuance of an enforcement clause, or a proceeding before an arbitration court.

3. Allowing the court to assess the compliance of an arbitration award with the fundamental principles of the legal order on the basis of facts or evidence which the arbitration court was not aware of would impermissibly expand the narrowly defined limits set by the law for the court’s review of an arbitration award. The opportunity to bring up new facts or evidence in a proceeding to set aside an arbitration award that could affect the decision on the dispute resolved by the award (as a result of its assessment under the public policy clause) would turn the proceeding into a proceeding not recognized by the Civil Procedure Code, comparable to a proceeding to renew the proceeding that ended in the arbitration award.

Data wydania: 12-10-2007 | Sygnatura: V CZ 91/07

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20241

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 12 September 2007 Case No. I CSK 192/07

1. The construction of the petition to set aside an arbitration award shows that this instrument is not intended for substantive review of the correctness of the decision of the arbitration court by the state court, as in the case of appellate review within a judicial proceeding.

2. The assessment of a decision by an arbitration court in substantive terms involves an assessment of whether it violates the rule of law or principles of social coexistence.

Data wydania: 12-09-2007 | Sygnatura: I CSK 192/07

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20240

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 11 May 2007 Case No. I CSK 82/07

1. When assessing whether a party was truly deprived of the opportunity to defend its rights in a proceeding before an arbitration court, the course of the arbitration proceeding should be considered scrupulously, also bearing in mind that the court is not authorized to review the decision made on the merits and that in making an arbitration agreement the parties consciously waived submission to the strictures in place for a proceeding before a [state] court.

2. A party is deprived of the opportunity to defend its rights before the arbitration court when the principle of equality of the parties is violated, and one of the parties is not heard and does not have the opportunity to address the evidence and allegations presented by the opposing party. For these reasons, every instance in which the arbitration court refuses to admit evidence sought by a party cannot be equated with depriving the party of a defence, because this happens only when the party has no opportunity to present and argue for its position.

3. Substantive review of an arbitration award by the court is limited to an assessment of whether the award that was issued violates principles of the legal order. The term used in the law, “fundamental principles of the legal order” (Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §2(2)) clearly indicates that this refers to such violations of substantive regulations that would result in violation of the principles of the rule of law, and the award violates the leading legal principles in force in the Republic of Poland and conflicts with the legal order in force, that is, violates the principles of the political and socio-economic system.

4. When deciding to submit a dispute for resolution by an arbitration court, the parties must be aware of both the positive and the negative effects of entering into the relevant clause in an agreement: on one hand they avoid a long-lasting proceeding, but on the other hand they waive certain procedural guarantees in force in a judicial proceeding.

Data wydania: 11-05-2007 | Sygnatura: I CSK 82/07

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20237

Katowice Appellate Court judgment dated 29 December 2006 Case No. I ACa 1589/06

Determination of whether an arbitration award violates fundamental principles of public order must be formulated narrowly, which means that the public policy clause may be successfully invoked only when the arbitration award would result in serious violation of such principles. This is thus an exceptional basis for setting aside an arbitration award and may be applied only in special circumstances, where the effects of the arbitration award would be incompatible with fundamental principles of the legal system. Mere inconsistency of the award with such principles is thus insufficient.

Data wydania: 29-12-2006 | Sygnatura: I ACa 1589/06

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20291

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 13 December 2006 Case No. II CSK 289/06

1. The arbitration court is subject only to the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code that govern procedure before the arbitration court. For this reason, a violation of general provisions of civil procedure law or overriding principles of civil procedure may serve as grounds for setting aside an arbitration award only if it results in violation of fundamental principles of the legal order of the Republic of Poland or principles of social coexistence.

2. A violation of the rule of law or principles of social coexistence as referred to in Civil Procedure Code Art. 712 §1(4) must be part of the content of the ruling itself, and thus it is insufficient if the violation occurred in the proceeding before the arbitration court.

3. If the arbitration court ignores evidence offered by a party because the arbitration court deemed the evidence unnecessary, that will not be regarded as depriving the party of a defence. The state court’s review of whether the arbitration court correctly found the evidence to be unnecessary would constitute impermissible intrusion into the merits of the case.

Data wydania: 13-12-2006 | Sygnatura: II CSK 289/06

Key issues: arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20232

Supreme Court judgment dated 8 December 2006 Case No. V CSK 321/06

1. Setting aside an arbitration award is justified ... only by such an offence to substantive law that it would result in a determination that undermines the rule of law. A violation of the rule of law should be understood to mean an offence against fundamental legal institutions. Thus a ruling that violates the rule of law would be one, for example, that contradicts overriding legal principles and is contrary to the generally accepted legal order in force in the Republic of Poland. In other words, an arbitration award may violate the rule of law if it results in a ruling that violates the principles of the rule of law in force.

2. The state court thus does not examine whether an arbitration award is contrary to substantive law or is founded on the facts determined in the award, or whether the facts were properly determined. The state court considers the case only from the point of view of the grounds for setting aside an award, which are exhaustively set forth in Civil Procedure Code Art. 712 (now Art. 1206 §2).

Data wydania: 08-12-2006 | Sygnatura: V CSK 321/06

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20231

Warsaw Appellate Court judgment dated 29 November 2006 Case No. I ACa 657/06

1. An essential difference between proceedings before a state court and an arbitration court is that the arbitration court is not bound by provisions of civil law. Thus mere failure to apply a particular provision of substantive law, or defective application, is insufficient to set aside an arbitration award. Violation of substantive law is grounds to set aside an arbitration award only if it results in a decision violating overriding legal principles in force in the Republic of Poland.

2. In a proceeding upon petition to set aside an arbitration award it is impermissible to review whether the arbitration court decided the case correctly in factual and legal terms.

3. An allegation that an arbitration award violated principles of social coexistence and good practice, or that it violated the principle of confidence in public authorities, is misplaced. An arbitration court is not a public authority.

Data wydania: 29-11-2006 | Sygnatura: I ACa 657/06

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20290

Warsaw Appellate Court judgment dated 8 November 2006 Case No. I ACa 792/06

1. As a rule, the right to a defence in a proceeding before an arbitration court may also be violated by preventing proof of allegations or defences. Mere submission of statements and expression of a position is primarily relevant to explanation and interpretation of legal issues, and may be insufficient for establishing the factual grounds for a decision which is after all not subject to appellate review. It should be added that this has to do with proof of circumstances that in the view of the arbitration court are highly relevant to the decision.

2. The rules of the arbitration court did not provide for expansion of the statement of claim, nor did they prohibit it. In such case, the inability to repeat the procedure for selection of arbitrators should, in the view of the Appellate Court, be assessed in light of the type of demand. If this really had to do with a claim not related to the existing claim, but requiring special qualifications of the panel, it could be concluded that there was an infringement of fundamental rules of procedure resulting in setting aside of the award in such part.

3. An untrue statement in a document later offered in evidence by a party is not ... grounds for a petition to set aside an arbitration award under Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §1(5).

4. An arbitration court is not bound by provisions of substantive law. This means that arbitration awards may be reviewed only within a limited scope. Setting aside an arbitration award is thus justified only by an infringement of substantive law that would also bring the decision into conflict with the overriding legal principles in force in the Republic of Poland. In other words, an arbitration award may be unlawful if it results in a decision that violates controlling principles of the rule of law.

5. Existence of the grounds set forth in Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §2(2) is not determined by the number of provisions violated but by the relation between a specific violation of law to the narrowly defined principles of the legal order of the Republic of Poland.

Data wydania: 08-11-2006 | Sygnatura: I ACa 792/06

Key issues: arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20289

Judgment of the Court of Justice of 26 October 2006, C-168/05, Elisa Maria Mostaza Claro v Centro Móvil Milenium SL

Council Directive 93/13 on unfair terms in consumer contracts must be interpreted as meaning that a national court seised of an action for annulment of an arbitration award must determine whether the arbitration agreement is void and annul that award where that agreement contains an unfair term, even though the consumer has not pleaded that invalidity in the course of the arbitration proceedings, but only in that of the action for annulment.

Data wydania: 26-10-2006 | Sygnatura: C-168/05

Key issues: arbitration agreement, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20325

Supreme Court judgment dated 18 October 2006 Case No. II CSK 123/06

The fundamental principles in force under Polish law with respect to liability for loss caused by non-performance or improper performance of an obligation, which are expressed in provisions of the Civil Code concerning the effects of failure to perform obligations, [are] ... the duty to redress loss by the party to an agreement which failed to perform or improperly performed an obligation, and an ordinary causal relationship between the behaviour and the loss. The duty to redress loss in this respect may not be determined arbitrarily or at will, but must correspond to the extent of the loss suffered (even as the result of an assessment based on consideration of all the circumstances of the case), and default interest is due from the date that the debtor falls into arrears. An arbitration award that was issued in violation of these principles is an award violating the rule of law.

Data wydania: 18-10-2006 | Sygnatura: II CSK 123/06

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20230

Supreme Court judgment dated 4 October 2006 Case No. II CSK 117/06

An arbitration award that is clearly inconsistent with a legal norm established by the parliament in the social interest violates the rule of law within the meaning of Civil Procedure Code Art. 712 §1(4).

Data wydania: 04-10-2006 | Sygnatura: II CSK 117/06

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20229

Supreme Court order dated 17 May 2006 Case No. I CSK 104/05

1. The constitutive elements of an arbitration award are defined by Civil Procedure Code Art. 708 §1, which is a regulation of mandatory applicability. One of these elements is a resolution of the demands of the parties (Art. 708 §1(4)). Thus it should be accepted that any ruling by the arbitration court containing the indicated elements, including a resolution of the demands of the parties, constitutes an arbitration award within the meaning of Book Three of the Civil Procedure Code, regardless of the form given to the ruling by the arbitration court.

2. In its case law, the Supreme Court has stressed on numerous occasions that the type of appellate instrument must be determined by the subject of the resolution, and not the form which the court gave to the ruling. ... This view applies also to rulings by an arbitration court.

Data wydania: 17-05-2006 | Sygnatura: I CSK 104/05

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20225

Warsaw Appellate Court judgment dated 4 April 2006 Case No. VI ACa 1138/05

1. The state court may not be accused of violating provisions of substantive law—Civil Code Art. 3531 and Art. 65 §2—because, under the view established for years in the case law … its role was not to reconsider the merits of the case previously resolved by the arbitration court, but to assess the justification for the petition under the grounds from Civil Procedure Code Art. 712 §1(4) set forth in the petition.

2. Assertion by the petitioner of the grounds under Civil Procedure Code Art. 712 §1(4), i.e. violation of the rule of law, requires a showing that the substantive law was violated by the arbitration court, and moreover that the violations are so numerous and of such importance that it conflicts with the overriding principles of law.

3. Without a doubt the overriding principles of civil law include the principle of freedom of contract expressed in Civil Code Art. 3531, providing the parties the ability to establish a legal relationship in accordance with their own discretion, so long as the substance or purpose thereof is not contrary to the nature of the relationship, a statute, or principles of social coexistence.

Data wydania: 04-04-2006 | Sygnatura: VI ACa 1138/05

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20377

Supreme Court judgment dated 31 March 2006 Case No. IV CSK 93/05

1. The defectiveness of an arbitration award in violating the rule of law must appear from the very wording of the ruling, and not from violation of regulations concerning proceedings before such court. Procedural violations might justify only some other ground for setting aside the arbitration award.

2. The minimum requirements that must be met by the justification for an arbitration award are set forth in Civil Procedure Code Art. 708 §1(5). If the grounds by which the arbitration court was guided when ruling on the demands of the parties may be deduced from the justification, that is sufficient for these requirements to be deemed to be satisfied.

3. The view cannot be accepted ... that the duty to conduct a thorough investigation of the circumstances necessary to resolve the case (Civil Procedure Code Art. 705 §2, third sentence) is performed by assessing the allegations of the parties and indicating why some of them are found to be valid and others not. Such assessment is made at the stage of making the ruling, and is expressed in the justification for the ruling made. Investigation of the circumstances that are relevant (essential) to the case occurs at an earlier phase of the proceeding and consists of hearing the parties, permitting them to submit statements with respect to the motions and allegations of the opposing party and the result of the evidentiary proceedings, and finally receiving evidence necessary to illuminate the circumstances essential to resolve the case.

Data wydania: 31-03-2006 | Sygnatura: IV CSK 93/05

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20221

Poznań Appellate Court judgment dated 16 November 2005 Case No. I ACa 912/05

The task of the court in a proceeding upon a petition to set aside an arbitration award is not to decide the merits of the case already decided by the arbitration court, applying provisions of substantive and procedural law, but only to conduct a review of the grounds for the petition under Civil Procedure Code Art. 712 §§ 1 and 2. The court where a petition to set aside an arbitration award is filed does not act as a court of second instance, authorized to review the case on the merits applying provisions of substantive law, but assesses the challenged award only in terms of the violations indicated in Civil Procedure Code Art. 712 §§ 1 and 2, and in the case considered here, Art. 712 §1(4).

Data wydania: 16-11-2005 | Sygnatura: I ACa 912/05

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20286

Poznań Appellate Court judgment dated 26 October 2005 Case No. I ACa 172/05

An arbitration award issued in violation of Civil Code Art. 64 and 65 §§ 1 and 2 infringes the rule of law because it forces the defendant to conclude a specific, unfavourable contract even though there is no duty to conclude such contract either under provisions of law or under the obligations undertaken by the defendant. This is a violation of the principle of commercial freedom, manifest among other things in the freedom to establish the terms of agreements and in the freedom to choose commercial partners.

Data wydania: 26-10-2005 | Sygnatura: I ACa 172/05

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20285

Katowice Appellate Court judgment dated 25 October 2005 Case No. I ACa 1174/05

When considering the petition, the court is authorized only to assess whether the arbitration award being challenged is affected by the violations set forth in Civil Procedure Code Art. 712 §1, and thus, in this case, violation of the rule of law or principles of social coexistence. Only then may an allegation of violation of substantive law provide a valid basis for setting aside an arbitration award, if such violation also constitutes an infringement of the principles of the rule of law.

Data wydania: 25-10-2005 | Sygnatura: I ACa 1174/05

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20284

Supreme Court judgment dated 11 August 2005 (Case No. V CK 86/05)

1. The limitation of the scope of review of an arbitration award to the grounds set forth in the act, but also those on which the petition to set aside the arbitration award is based, is subject to the exception of the duty of the [state] court, expressly provided in Civil Procedure Code Art. 714, to review on its own motion whether a violation of law by the arbitration court resulted in issuance of an award that violates the legal order or principles of social coexistence.

2. In a proceeding to set aside an arbitration award, the subject of the case is clearly the review of the award within the grounds of the mandatory provisions of the Civil Procedure Code, and the subject of the proceeding may not be regarded as falling within the scope of the business activity of any business entities.

3. A proceeding to set aside an arbitration award is a distinct type of proceeding, containing elements of a cassation proceeding, but the reference set forth in the mandatorily applicable rule of Civil Procedure Code Art. 715 does not justify application, even only as relevant, of the code provisions concerning the procedure in commercial cases, because the subject matter and function of the two types of proceedings are completely different.

Data wydania: 11-08-2005 | Sygnatura: V CK 86/05

Key issues: arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20218

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 21 December 2004 (Case No. I CK 405/04)

In a case seeking to set aside an arbitration award, the court will consider on its own motion only one of the grounds for the petition, namely that provided by Civil Procedure Code Art. 712 §1(4), i.e. whether the arbitration award violates the legal order or principles of social coexistence. This means that all other grounds for the petition, including that there was no arbitration clause or the clause was invalid or expired (Civil Procedure Code Art. 712 §1(1)), will be considered by the court only if asserted in the petition (the petition was based on such grounds).

Data wydania: 21-12-2004 | Sygnatura: I CK 405/04

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20211

Katowice Appellate Court judgment dated 18 October 2004 Case No. I ACa 565/04

1. The court where a petition to set aside an arbitration award is filed does not act as a court of second instance, authorized to review the case on the merits applying provisions of substantive law, but assesses the challenged award only in terms of the violations indicated in Civil Procedure Code Art. 712 §§ 1 and 2.

2. There can be no violation of the rule of law where the arbitration award complies with substantive law in force and was not issued in violation of provisions of substantive law, let alone gross violation. Only a gross violation would warrant a finding that the arbitration award violated the rule of law.

Data wydania: 18-10-2004 | Sygnatura: I ACa 565/04

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20282

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 16 June 2004 (Case No. III CK 97/04)

The relative nature of Civil Code Art. 740, relied on by the appellant, ... means that even if this provision served as the substantive legal grounds for considering the claim that is the subject of the dispute, it cannot be treated as a fundamental provision, essential to the legal order.

Data wydania: 16-06-2004 | Sygnatura: III CK 97/04

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20205

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 21 May 2004 (Case No. III CK 60/03)

When a petition [to set aside an arbitration award] is based on allegations of violation of substantive law, it is necessary to demonstrate one of the aggravating aspects of such violation that constitutes violation of the legal order or principles of social coexistence in the Republic of Poland (Civil Procedure Code Art. 712 §1(4)). A showing of violation of substantive law is not legally sufficient grounds for granting a petition to set aside an arbitration award.

Data wydania: 21-05-2004 | Sygnatura: III CK 60/03

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20204

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 26 September 2003 Case No. IV CK 17/02

A finding that an award is inconsistent with the facts does not always result in setting aside the award. It is accepted that an application alleging violation of the rule of law is justified when the effect of an arbitration award conflicts with fundamental principles of the legal order of the state.

Data wydania: 26-09-2003 | Sygnatura: IV CK 17/02

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20199

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 11 July 2002 Case No. IV CKN 1211/00

1. Arbitration awards may be reviewed only to a limited extent. Setting aside an arbitration award is thus justified only by such an abuse of substantive law that it also constitutes a decision that violates the leading principles of law in force in the Republic of Poland. In other words, an arbitration award may violate the rule of law only if it results in a resolution violating the principles of a state governed by the rule of law.

2. An arbitration award also requires examination in terms of whether it violates the principle of the freedom of economic activity, enshrined in Art. 20 of the Constitution. Under Art. 5 of the Economic Activity Law dated 19 November 1999 (Journal of Laws Dz.U. 1999 No. 101 item 1178, as amended), this constitutional principle is manifest in the rule that taking up and conducting economic activity shall be free for all persons, under equal rights, and compliance with conditions defined by law is a statutory requirement for limiting the application of this principle.

3. A finding cannot be upheld … that an arbitration court did not violate principles of social coexistence without an attempt to address specific principles more closely. In the context of contractual relations, these principles are manifest in the existence of the universally accepted rules of decent behaviour, with respect to a potential counterparty as well. With respect to commercial relations, of particular relevance are the principles of fair dealing and commercial honesty, which may be demanded of a business entity—a professional on the market—namely observance of good practice, fair dealing, honest treatment, loyalty and trust.

Data wydania: 11-07-2002 | Sygnatura: IV CKN 1211/00

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20191

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 11 April 2002 Case No. III CKN 492/01

1. It follows from the nature of a petition to set aside an arbitration award that the state court with jurisdiction to hear the petition may not consider the merits of the dispute, because in deciding the case and issuing its ruling, the arbitration court is not bound by substantive or procedural law, so long as it does not violate the rule of law or principles of [social] coexistence. This means that the state court will not examine whether the arbitration award is consistent with substantive law or is justified by the facts found in the award, or whether such facts were correctly determined. The state court considers the case only in terms of the grounds for setting aside the award, which are exhaustively listed in Civil Procedure Code Art. 712.

2. The failure by the arbitration court to reduce a contractual penalty, in violation of Civil Code Art. 484 §2, may constitute justified grounds for setting aside an arbitration award, if the awards results in a resolution that clearly conflicts with principles of social coexistence. An arbitration award assessing a clearly grossly excessive contractual penalty violates such principles.

Data wydania: 11-04-2002 | Sygnatura: III CKN 492/01

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20189

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 12 March 2002 Case No. IV CKN 844/00

1. A proceeding before the state court pursuant to a petition to set aside an arbitration award is formal in nature, which is evident among other aspects from the limitation of the grounds for the petition (Civil Procedure Code Art. 712 §1) and the deadline for filing it (Civil Procedure Code Art. 713 §§1 and 2), and by the court’s being bound by the grounds for the petition for renewal, while it is permissible for the court to consider on its own motion whether the award violates the rule of law or principles of social coexistence (Civil Procedure Code Art. 714). In consequence, these regulations must be interpreted strictly.

2. A petition to set aside an award is a specific pleading in the nature of appellate review. It must meet the formal requirements of a pleading (Civil Procedure Code Art. 126) and provide the grounds and justification (Civil Procedure Code Art. 714 a contrario). The existence of any of the grounds may not be presumed. Action by the court consisting of interpretation of the grounds for the petition in order to ascribe grounds other than those expressly stated would usurp the role of the party to perform its procedural duties, and would also threaten arbitrary interpretation not necessarily consistent with the position taken by the petitioner. Thus it should be regarded as impermissible.

3. The concepts of the rule of law and principles of social coexistence are not the same. Lumping them into one normative category of general clauses does not mean it is permissible to apply them interchangeably and ascribe the same substance to the two concepts.

Data wydania: 12-03-2002 | Sygnatura: IV CKN 844/00

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20188

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 11 July 2001 Case No. V CKN 379/00

The essence of an arbitration clause is submission of a dispute to the arbitration court for resolution. If the agreement does not provide the arbitration court with a dispute-resolution function, then it does not contain an arbitration clause.

Data wydania: 11-07-2001 | Sygnatura: V CKN 379/00

Key issues: arbitration agreement, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20184

Cracow Appellate Court judgment dated 24 April 2001 Case No. I ACa 277/01

1. Pursuant to Civil Procedure Code Art. 712 §1(4), an arbitration award may be set aside if the ruling on the demands of the parties violates the rule of law or principles of social coexistence. This provision enacts a general clause representing the principle of domestic public policy. This means that violation or incorrect interpretation of substantive law, and the resulting defect of the ruling, in and of itself does not constitute a violation of the rule of law. A violation of substantive law must be such that it would result in issuance of a ruling that would by its content violate fundamental principles of the rule of law, particularly situations where a ruling is issued using an institution that is impermissible by operation of law.

2. Incorrect interpretation of substantive law and other violations not rising to such level cannot lead to a finding that the grounds for the petition set forth in Civil Procedure Code Art. 712 §1(4) have been met.

Data wydania: 24-04-2001 | Sygnatura: I ACa 277/01

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20281

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 28 November 2000 Ca e No. IV CKN 171/00

1. After the period indicated in Civil Procedure Code Art. 713 §1 expires, the ability to supplement the grounds for a petition to set aside an arbitration award is precluded.

2. It cannot be accepted ... that an award violates the rule of law solely on the grounds that the ruling is not consistent with certain provisions of substantive law. The arbitration court is generally not bound at all by provisions of substantive law. It is bound to apply mandatorily applicable provisions of law whose violation would be tantamount to violation of the rule of law or principles of social coexistence.

Data wydania: 28-11-2000 | Sygnatura: IV CKN 171/00

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20181

Polish Supreme Court order dated 29 August 2000 Case No. I CKN 161/00

If under Art. 87 of the Public Procurement Law the appellate proceeding is governed by the arbitration provisions of the Civil Procedure Code (unless otherwise provided by statute), the petition to set aside must be dismissed if the deadline to file the petition is not met.

Data wydania: 29-08-2000 | Sygnatura: I CKN 161/00

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20178

Polish Supreme Court order dated 31 May 2000 Case No. I CKN 182/00

1. A petition to set aside an arbitration award constitutes a special form of state court supervision over the arbitration court. Avenues of appeal will lie from the judgment by the court issued as a result of consideration of the petition, under general rules, not excluding a cassation appeal.

2. For the parties to an arbitration proceeding, the opportunity to file a petition to set aside the arbitration award constitutes a specific means of review of the award issued in the proceeding, and the ruling by the state court concluding the proceeding on the petition to set aside the arbitration award definitively concludes the proceeding before the state court. Thus only such a ruling may be characterized as “concluding the proceeding in the matter.” ... Thus also such characterization may be not be ascribed to an order on enforcement of an arbitration award.

Data wydania: 31-05-2000 | Sygnatura: I CKN 182/00

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20174

Warsaw Appellate Court judgment dated 29 May 2000 Case No. I ACa 65/00

The arbitration court’s violation or incorrect interpretation of substantive law, and the resulting defect of the ruling, in and of itself does not constitute a violation of the rule of law. A violation of substantive law must be such that it would result in issuance of a ruling that would by its content violate fundamental principles of the rule of law. The fact that the case concerns public procurement paid for out of public funds does not change this assessment and does not mean that violation of any of the provisions of [the Public Procurement Law] constitutes a violation of the rule of law.

Data wydania: 29-05-2000 | Sygnatura: I ACa 65/00

Key issues: arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20280

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 28 April 2000 Case No. II CKN 267/00

1. Mere incorrect interpretation of substantive law by the arbitration court may not justify granting a petition to set aside the arbitration award. It will be otherwise if the arbitration award, in violating specific norms of substantive law, at the same time violates the rule of law. This has to do with an instance in which ... the violation of substantive law by the arbitration court results in a resolution that violates the leading legal principles in force in the Republic of Poland.

2. The arbitration court’s not being bound by provisions of substantive law derives primarily from the fact that resolution of a matter is typically entrusted to arbitrators because of their special knowledge, e.g. in the field of construction (in construction cases) or concerning commercial practices (in cases related to international transactions)—where such specialized knowledge is more important than knowledge of the substantive legal norms of a specific legal system. In such cases, the arbitrators’ legal intuition may be sufficient.

Data wydania: 28-04-2000 | Sygnatura: II CKN 267/00

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20173

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 13 December 1999 Case No. III CKN 478/98

1. A petition to set aside an arbitration award cannot be regarded as an avenue of appeal. A petition to set aside an arbitration award and the proceeding initiated by filing the petition is of a specific nature. It combines features of an extraordinary avenue of appeal and an independent claim, understood in a specific manner, seeking to establish a right or a legal relationship. This is because the petition is intended to change the legal situation governed by the ruling by the arbitration court, and seeks to set aside the legally final award of the arbitration court.

2. The deadline of one month to file a petition to set aside an arbitration award (Civil Procedure Code Art. 713 §1) is also met if by that time the petition is filed with a court other than the one that would have been competent to decide the dispute if the parties had not made an arbitration clause (Civil Procedure Code Art. 696 §1).

Data wydania: 13-12-1999 | Sygnatura: III CKN 478/98

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20165

Polish Supreme Court ruling dated 22 September 1999 Case No. I CKN 654/99

1. For the parties to an arbitration proceeding, the opportunity to file a petition to set aside the arbitration award constitutes a specific means of review of the award issued in the proceeding, and the ruling by the state court concluding the proceeding on the petition to set aside the arbitration award definitively concludes the proceeding before the state court. Thus only such a ruling may be characterized as “concluding the proceeding in the matter.” ... Therefore such characterization may be not be ascribed to an order on enforcement of an arbitration award.

2. No cassation appeal will lie from an order by the court of second instance denying an interlocutory appeal from an order on enforcement of an arbitration award, because it is not a ruling concluding the proceeding in the matter within the meaning of Civil Procedure Code Art. 392 §1.

Data wydania: 22-09-1999 | Sygnatura: I CKN 654/99

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award

id: 20163

Judgment of the Court of Justice of 1 July 1999, C-126/97, Eco Swiss China Time Ltd v Benetton International NV

1. Where domestic rules of procedure require a national court to grant an application for annulment of an arbitration award where such an application is founded on failure to observe national rules of public policy, it must also grant such an application where it is founded on failure to comply with the prohibition laid down in Article 85 of the Treaty (now Article 81 EC). That provision constitutes a fundamental provision which is essential for the accomplishment of the tasks entrusted to the Community and, in particular, for the functioning of the internal market. Also, Community law requires that questions concerning the interpretation of the prohibition laid down in Article 85 should be open to examination by national courts when they are asked to determine the validity of an arbitration award and that it should be possible for those questions to be referred, if necessary, to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling.

2. Community law does not require a national court to refrain from applying domestic rules of procedure according to which an interim arbitration award which is in the nature of a final award and in respect of which no application for annulment has been made within the prescribed time-limit acquires the force of res judicata and may no longer be called in question by a subsequent arbitration award, even if this is necessary in order to examine, in proceedings for annulment of a subsequent arbitration award, whether an agreement which the interim award held to be valid in law is nevertheless void under Article 85 of the Treaty (now Article 81 EC), where the time-limit prescribed does not render excessively difficult or virtually impossible the exercise of rights conferred by Community law.

Data wydania: 01-07-1999 | Sygnatura: C-126/97

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20320

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 3 September 1998 Case No. I CKN 822/97

1. An assignee enters into the legal position of the assignor. The flip side of this rule, as it were, is the permissibility of the debtor’s asserting against the assignee any defences that it had against the assignor as of the time it received notice of the assignment (Civil Code Art. 513 §1). The debtor of a claim under an agreement containing an arbitration clause who is sued before the state court may thus assert the arbitration clause as a defence (Civil Procedure Code Art. 697 §2 in connection with Art. 202) against the assignee as well.

2. The effectiveness of an arbitration clause against an assignee excludes assertion of the lack of an arbitration clause, as the plaintiff appears as an assignee who acquired the claim subject to the clause.

3. It is accepted that a conclusion of violation of the rule of law is justified when the result of the arbitration award conflicts with fundamental principles of the legal order of the state..., for example, the ruling by the arbitration court is clearly inconsistent with the established facts.

4. With respect to the criterion indicated in Civil Procedure Code Art. 712 §1(4) of principles of social coexistence, it is necessary to indicate specific principles of social coexistence that are irreconcilable with which the effects of the arbitration award.

Data wydania: 03-09-1998 | Sygnatura: I CKN 822/97

Key issues: arbitration agreement, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20154

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 27 May 1998 Case No. I CKN 709/97

The arbitration court is not bound by regulations of substantive law in force, as the one criterion for assessing the correctness of the award provided by the code is the requirement of lawfulness and principles of social coexistence. This means ... that a petition to set aside an arbitration award may not be granted only because the award is found to have legal or factual defects.

Data wydania: 27-05-1998 | Sygnatura: I CKN 709/97

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20152

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 16 May 1997 Case No. I CKN 205/97

1. Civil Procedure Code Art. 705 §2 specifies the procedure only before the arbitration court, as demonstrated at least by its placement in Chapter 3, Title 3 of the Civil Procedure Code, containing regulations governing the procedure before the arbitration court. Thus because Art. 705 §2 imposes specific duties only on the arbitration court, it could not be violated by the court of second instance, which is a state court.

2. Civil Procedure Code Art. 714 defines the bounds of action by the common court hearing a petition to set aside an arbitration award, based on the grounds listed in Art. 712 §1. It is thus clear that Art. 714 defines the bounds of the action of the common court, but it is the court hearing the case in the first instance. Thus the allegation of violation of Art. 714 cannot be addressed directly to the court of appeal, which is a court of second instance.

3. The regulations of the Civil Procedure Code concerning the procedure before the arbitration court do not contain a requirement that the arbitration court is absolutely bound by the rules of substantive law when it considers the merits of the dispute. Art. 712 §1(4) and a linguistic interpretation thereof justify the conclusion that it is the duty of the arbitration court to apply imperative legal norms whose violation would also violate the rule of law Or principles of social coexistence.

4. Even violation of norms of substantive law by the arbitration court will not always be tantamount to violation of the rule of law or principles of social coexistence, because it will depend on the circumstances of the specific case.

5. Civil Procedure Code Art. 712 §1(4) will be met only by a violation of substantive legal norms, even those of a peremptory nature, made by the arbitration award, as a result of which the ruling by the arbitration court will also cause a clear violation of the overriding principles of the legal order in force in the Republic of Poland, or conflict with clearly defined principles of social coexistence.

6. There may be said to be a violation of systemic statutes having such effect with respect to statutes governing the system and principles for functioning of the State as a whole or its highest bodies, but not the functioning of one specific local governmental unit.

Data wydania: 16-05-1997 | Sygnatura: I CKN 205/97

Key issues: arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20147

Poznań Appellate Court judgment dated 23 May 1996 Case No. I ACr 189/96

1. Recusal of an entire court may not be demanded, but only recusal of specific judges (one or more of them), identified by name, but this does not mean that in this case the arbitration court itself could determine that the motion by the defendant should not be granted. The province court correctly stated that the arbitration court may not decide a motion to recuse an arbitrator, either on the merits or on procedural grounds, even if the motion was clearly unjustified or late.

2. The ruling issued as a result of a petition to set aside an arbitration award is in the nature of cassation, and thus the state court may only set aside the award or deny the petition, and may not rule on the merits. In consequence, when the state court sets aside an arbitration award by granting a petition under Civil Procedure Code Art. 712 §1(2)–(5), the arbitration court retains its jurisdiction to decide the dispute.

Data wydania: 23-05-1996 | Sygnatura: I ACr 189/96

Key issues: arbitrator, jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20272

Gdańsk Appellate Court judgment dated 14 July 1995 Case No. I ACr 424/95

1. An essential difference in comparison with the procedure before the state court is that the arbitration court is not bound either by civil procedure regulations (Civil Procedure Code Art. 705) or by provisions of substantive civil law. While it is true in the latter case that there is no express provision to this effect, a conclusion of this kind follows clearly from an analysis of Civil Procedure Code Art. 711 §3 and Art. 712 §1(4), which provide that violation of the rule of law or principles of social coexistence is the only criterion for assessment of the correctness of an arbitration award.

2. Under Civil Procedure Code Art. 712 §1(4), assertion of the objection that an arbitration award violates specific provisions of substantive law may be effective only insofar as the violation of specific norms also violates the principles of the rule of law in the state of Poland, which requires a demonstration firstly that the substantive law was violated, and moreover that the violations are so numerous that it conflicts with the very rule of the prevailing legal order as seen from the perspective of systemic, political and socio-economic principles.

Data wydania: 14-07-1995 | Sygnatura: I ACr 424/95

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20345

Judgment of the Court of Justice of 6 October 2009., C-40/08, Gemeente Almelo and Others v Energiebedrijf IJsselmij NV

A national court which, in a case provided for by law, determines an appeal against an arbitration award must be regarded as a court or tribunal within the meaning of Article 177 of the Treaty, even if under the terms of the arbitration agreement made between the parties that court must give judgment according to what appears fair and reasonable.

Data wydania: 27-04-1994 | Sygnatura: C-393/92

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20364

Polish Supreme Court order dated 27 July 1993 Case No. I CO 23/93

The Polish state court has jurisdiction in a proceeding to set aside an arbitration award if the award in a dispute of an international character was rendered in Poland, even if none of the links referred to in Civil Procedure Code Art. 1103 would justify such jurisdiction. And conversely, it should be found that the Polish court does not have jurisdiction in a proceeding to set aside an arbitration award rendered abroad, even if one of the links referred to in Civil Procedure Code Art. 1103 could have justified such jurisdiction.

Data wydania: 27-07-1993 | Sygnatura: I CO 23/93

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20139

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 27 April 1988 Case No. I CR 81/88

In the context of Civil Procedure Code Art. 712(4), violation of the principles of social coexistence is equated with conditions disqualifying an arbitration award to a degree depriving it of value as the basis for resolution of the dispute (violation of the rule of law, unintelligibility or inconsistency), and thus highly exceptional.

Data wydania: 27-04-1988 | Sygnatura: I CR 81/88

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20135

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 3 June 1987 Case No. I CR 120/87

1. A petition to set aside an arbitration award is not ... an appeal, but a procedural measure with a nature similar to a petition to reopen a proceeding.

2. The statement in the second sentence of Civil Procedure Code Art. 705 §2 that an arbitration court is not bound by civil procedure regulations does not refer to mandatorily applicable regulations set forth in Book Three of the code. Civil Procedure Code Art. 712–715, which have this character, apply in every arbitration proceeding. The lack of any indication to this effect in the rules defining the procedure before the arbitration court therefore does not exclude the permissibility of filing a petition with the state court to set aside an award issued by a permanent arbitration court (Civil Procedure Code Art. 695).

Data wydania: 03-06-1987 | Sygnatura: I CR 120/87

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20133

Polish Supreme Court order dated 27 June 1984 Case No. II CZ 67/84

The scope of the challenge is set by the party and is binding on the court (Civil Procedure Code Art. 696) when considering an action commenced by a petition to set aside an arbitration award (Civil Procedure Code Art. 712–715).

Data wydania: 27-06-1984 | Sygnatura: II CZ 67/84

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20130

Polish Supreme Court order dated 27 August 1982 Case No. II CR 214/82

[In an action to set aside an arbitration award] a link that could justify domestic jurisdiction is issuance of the award in Poland, as such a ruling, when legally final, would become a domestic Polish ruling equivalent to a judgment of a Polish state court (Civil Procedure Code Art. 711 §2). However, the seat of an international arbitration court which may hear cases in the territory of other countries for which it was established will not serve as such a link.

Data wydania: 27-08-1982 | Sygnatura: II CR 214/82

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20128

Polish Supreme Court resolution dated 20 February 1974 Case No. III CZP 2/74

1. A creditor’s application to the state court for confirmation of the enforceability of an arbitration award, as well as an application for issuance of an enforcement clause for the award, do not interrupt the running of the statute of limitations on the claims covered by the arbitration award.

2. The state court’s confirmation of the enforceability of an arbitration award and issuance of an enforcement clause for the award are two distinct actions by the court, made under separate procedures: namely, confirmation of enforceability occurs in a proceeding provided for in Part One, Book Three of the Civil Procedure Code, which governs the procedure before the arbitration court and before the state court in matters concerning arbitration awards, while issuance of an enforcement clause for an arbitration award occurs in an execution proceeding (Part Two, Book One of the Civil Procedure Code). Moreover, an enforcement clause may be issued only for an arbitration award as to which a legally final order of the state court confirming its enforceability has been issued pursuant to Civil Procedure Code Art. 711.

3. Arbitration, based on the agreement of the parties and carried out by arbitrators, persons trusted by the parties, who in performance of their voluntarily assumed obligations are generally constrained by procedural regulations to only a small degree, must of necessity be overseen by the state courts. Such oversight has to do on one hand with the correctness of the appointment of the arbitration court and the parties’ selection of the arbitrators, and on the other hand with the substance of the actual ruling by the arbitration court. By its nature, the review of the substance of the award cannot includes the very correctness or justice of the resolution, but is limited to whether the ruling was issued under conditions assuring the parties protection of their rights, and whether the resolution violates the rule of law or principles of social coexistence. Review of an arbitration award in the broadest sense is performed by a state court only upon request of a party, asserted in the form of a petition to set aside the arbitration award, as provided in Civil Procedure Code Art. 712 ff, limited in time and in the scope of grounds for challenging the award. However, review of the consistency of the award with principles of the rule of law and principles of social coexistence is made by the state court on its own motion, and the institution of confirmation of enforceability of the award serves this purpose.

4. An order confirming the enforceability of an arbitration award, although a necessary condition for permitting enforcement of the award through state compulsion, does not in itself constitute an act seeking to enforce the award. Thus asserting a demand for confirmation of enforceability is not among the acts undertaken “with the immediate purpose of enforcement, declaration or security” of the claim adjudged by the award within the meaning of Civil Code Art. 123 §1(1).

Data wydania: 20-02-1974 | Sygnatura: III CZP 2/74

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award

id: 20119

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 21 December 1973 Case No. I CR 663/73

As the arbitration court is not even required to rule on the basis of provisions of substantive law, an erroneous interpretation thereof cannot be regarded as a violation of the rule of law. Nor may the arbitration court be required not to apply regulations involving the statute of limitations and preclusion. More justified would be the opposite view, that failure to apply such regulations, which were enacted primarily in the interest of protecting the legal order—not disturbing settled matters (quieta non movere)—and entering an award for time-barred claims, could justify an allegation of violation of the rule of law.

Data wydania: 21-12-1973 | Sygnatura: I CR 663/73

Key issues: arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20118

id: 20114 Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 22 December 1970 Case No. III CRN 327/70

A petition to set aside an arbitration award may be based on the same grounds that provide the basis for reopening a proceeding. Under Civil Procedure Code Art. 403 §1, reopening of a proceeding may be sought on the grounds that the judgment was based on a forged or altered document. However, this does not apply to a situation in which the allegation of forgery of the document was raised in the earlier proceeding and found by the court to be groundless. In such situation, a petition to reopen the proceeding may be based on newly discovered facts or evidence (Civil Procedure Code Art. 403 §2) demonstrating that the court’s conclusion as to the authenticity of the document was erroneous, or upon discovery of a legally final criminal conviction for forging or altering the document.

Data wydania: 22-12-1970 | Sygnatura: III CRN 327/70

Key issues: arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20114

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 13 December 1967 Case No. I CR 445/67

1. Because when considering and ruling on a dispute the arbitration court is not bound by provisions of substantive or procedural law, so long as it does not violate the rule of law or principles of social coexistence, it thus also follows from the essence of a petition to set aside an arbitration award that the state court with jurisdiction to consider the petition may not review the merits of the dispute. This means that the state court will not examine whether the arbitration award is contrary to substantive law or is based on the facts stated in the award, or whether such facts were properly determined. The state court will consider the case only from the perspective of the grounds for setting aside the award, exhaustively listed in Civil Procedure Code Art. 712.

2. Attention should be paid to the fundamental distinction between consideration of a case on the basis of Civil Procedure Code Art. 711 §3 and Art. 712. It is clear from a comparison of these two provisions that when ruling pursuant to Art. 711 §3, the state court relies only on the file of the arbitration court and does not admit any evidence in order to determine the factual circumstances necessary to assess whether the substance of the arbitration award violates the rule of law or principles of social coexistence, and thus this provision authorizes the court to find that the substance of the arbitration award violates the rule of law or principles of social coexistence only when this appears from the arbitration file submitted to the court. However, pursuant to a petition to set aside an arbitration award, a normal adversarial proceeding is held (Civil Procedure Code Art. 715), in the course of which it is possible to conduct an evidentiary proceeding under general rules, and thus to admit evidence in order to determine the factual circumstances necessary for an assessment of the grounds asserted in the petition.

3. In the event of the legally final setting aside of an arbitration award, the way is open to the parties to assert a claim on the same subject matter before the state court, or for the parties to conclude a new clause and again submit the matter to a designated arbitration court for resolution.

Data wydania: 13-12-1967 | Sygnatura: I CR 445/67

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20108

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 15 February 1964 Case No. I CR 123/63

1. The arbitration award in this case could be considered only under Civil Procedure Code Art. 510, and more precisely—given the lack of other allegations—from the point of view of whether the award in its substance violates the rule of law or principles of social coexistence.

2. The arbitration court considered the case as if the agreement between the parties had not been performed at all, which is clearly contrary to the state of facts..., and if that is so, the ruling by the court of first instance results in ... grossly privileging the defendant, to the detriment of the State Treasury. Such a grossly erroneous ruling violates the rule of law (Civil Procedure Code Art. 510 §1(4)).

Data wydania: 15-02-1964 | Sygnatura: I CR 123/63

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20102

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 6 January 1961 Case No. 2 CR 532/59

1. A petition [to set aside an arbitration award] must state specifically what allegations the petitioner is asserting against the arbitration award, and must be filed within the time provided in Civil Procedure Code Art. 511. Upon expiration of such period, the right to file the petition lapses, and if a petition was filed on time, the ability to extend the petition to include other grounds also lapses.

2. If a petition [to set aside an arbitration award] was filed on time (Civil Procedure Code Art. 511 §1), the issue of whether the arbitration award violates the rule of law or principles of social coexistence in the People’s State must be taken into consideration by the court at its own initiative, and thus also when the petition does not include an allegation in this respect or if the petitioner in raising such allegation perceives such defectiveness of the arbitration award in some respect other than that in which it actually occurred.

3. If in a proceeding pursuant to a petition to set aside an arbitration award a party raises further allegations against the arbitration award after the deadline under Civil Procedure Code Art. 511, such new allegations, because they are precluded, may not constitute additional grounds for the petition, but nonetheless must be considered by the court at its own initiative insofar as they are relevant to a determination which the court must make at its own initiative, namely a determination of whether the arbitration award violates the rule of law or principles of social coexistence in the People’s State.

4. It follows from the fact that the code lists exhaustively the grounds for the petition [to set aside an arbitration award] (Civil Procedure Code Art. 510 §1) that the scope of such grounds may not be interrelated logically in such a manner that some of them are controlling and others are subordinate to them. If the grounds were interrelated in that way, the code would not have listed one of the grounds separately if all of it could be subsumed under another of the grounds.

5. The fact that the code permits arbitration (Civil Procedure Code Art. 8) and ascribes legal force to arbitration awards equal to state court judgments (Civil Procedure Code Art. 508 §2) even though arbitration awards may not be consistent with provisions of substantive law excludes acceptance of the position that any inconsistency with provisions of substantive law in and of itself disqualifies an arbitration award. As long as the substance of the award does not violate the rule of law or principles of social coexistence (Civil Procedure Code Art. 509 and 510 §1(4)), the issue of whether the award is consistent with provisions of substantive law is not subject to any review.

Data wydania: 06-01-1961 | Sygnatura: 2 CR 532/59

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20100

Polish Supreme Court judgment dated 14 November 1960 Case No. 2 CR 1044/59

Erroneous interpretation or improper application of substantive law does not in and of itself constitute sufficient grounds for a petition to set aside an arbitration award, defined by Civil Procedure Code Art. 510 §1(4) as violation of the rule of law or principles of social coexistence in the People’s State. Violation of substantive law may constitute sufficient grounds to set aside an arbitration award if it would result in a determination that clearly violates the overriding principles of the legal system in the People’s State or violates principles of social coexistence. Such principles must also be respected in arbitration.

Data wydania: 14-11-1960 | Sygnatura: 2 CR 1044/59

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20099

Polish Supreme Court resolution dated 12 October 1960 Case No. 3 CO 21/60

1. No review [by the province court] will lie against an order by the county court appointing an arbitrator pursuant to Civil Procedure Code Art. 492.

2. An interested party will be able to assert its allegations connected with appointment of an arbitrator under Civil Procedure Code Art. 492 in an eventual petition to set aside the arbitration award, which may be filed with the state court in the event of the existence of the defects referred to in Civil Procedure Code Art. 510 §1.

Data wydania: 12-10-1960 | Sygnatura: 3 CO 21/60

Key issues: arbitrator, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20098

Polish Supreme Court ruling dated 17 September 1956 Case No. 3 CR 505/56

1. It follows from Civil Procedure Code Art. 488 §2, which provides that each party shall appoint one arbitrator and the arbitrators so appointed “shall appoint a presiding arbitrator,” unless the arbitration clause provides otherwise, and from Art. 492, which provides that in the event of lack of agreement between the arbitrators, the presiding arbitrator shall be appointed by the state court, that the appointment of a presiding arbitrator is mandatory unless the arbitration clause provides otherwise.

2. Because as a result of failure to appoint a presiding arbitrator the arbitration court was not appointed in the prescribed composition, the award issued by an arbitration court composed of two arbitrators was made in an invalid proceeding.

3. Under applicable law, violation of regulations concerning the composition of the arbitration court constitute absolute grounds for setting aside the arbitration award in every instance.

Data wydania: 17-09-1956 | Sygnatura: 3 CR 505/56

Key issues: arbitrator, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20092

Polish Supreme Court ruling dated 14 February 1956 Case No. IV CO 29/55

1. It follows from the title of Book III and from the first sentence of Civil Procedure Code Art. 510 that the petition provided for in this chapter is applicable only to arbitration awards, and via such petition it is possible only to seek to set aside an award. Such petition cannot be extended by analogy to apply also to a settlement, as the role of the arbitration court in conclusion of a settlement is limited to accepting and documenting the settlement, and thus the settlement does not contain any of the elements constituting the essence of a judicial determination.

2. A party rightly disputing the validity of a settlement is not in any respect bound by the settlement, but should assert such invalidity not by relying on Civil Procedure Code Art. 510, but by other means. An action for a declaration of the invalidity of the settlement will serve this end, or an action based on Civil Procedure Code Art. 573 if the party wishes to restrict itself to depriving the settlement of its enforceability, although in such instance the time limits provided in Art. 573 §1(2) will not apply because they are strictly tied to the res judicata effect of a judgment, which settlements do not have.

3. Absolute invalidity, which would deprive an award or settlement of the character of a judicial act even without the need to challenge the award, would come into play if persons were sitting as arbitrators who had not actually been appointed as such.

4. Under Civil Procedure Code Art. 508 §1, arbitration awards as well as settlements concluded before an arbitration court are equivalent to state court judgments. Thus with respect to an undertaking to make declarations of will, they exert the same effects as state court judgments.

Data wydania: 14-02-1956 | Sygnatura: IV CO 29/55

Key issues: settlement before arbitral tribunal, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20091

Polish Supreme Court ruling dated 12 November 1955 Case No. 1 CR 378/55

1. A proceeding upon a petition to set aside an arbitration award is not an appeal against the award. In the proceeding upon a petition to set aside an arbitration [award], the state court does not judge the case anew, nor does it conduct full review of the award, but its task is only to determine whether the grounds to set aside the award alleged in the petition exist.

2. An arbitration court rules within its discretion, but the bounds of such discretion are set by Civil Procedure Code Art. 510 §1.

3. An arbitration clause is also a type of disposition by the parties, an effect of which is the possibility of the arbitration court to resolve the dispute in a manner that violates substantive law but is nonetheless binding on the party.

4. As the challenged arbitration award does not in its substance violate the rule of law, even if it violated substantive law, the Supreme Court has no basis for ruling on whether the award is consistent or inconsistent with substantive law.

Data wydania: 12-11-1955 | Sygnatura: 1 CR 378/55

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20296

Polish Supreme Court ruling dated 29 September 1948 Case No. Wa C 162/48

1. [Civil Procedure Code] Art. 503 §1(4) regards it as sufficient grounds for a petition to set aside an arbitration award if in its substance the award violates public policy or fair practices, but Art. 502 authorizes the court to take notice of the inconsistency between the substance of the award and public policy and fair practices only when such appears from the arbitration record submitted to the court.

2. Pursuant to a petition to set aside an arbitration award, a normal adversarial proceeding is held (Civil Procedure Code Art. 505), during the course of which evidence may be admitted in accordance with general rules.

3. By its nature, a proceeding for issuance of an enforcement clause should be short and simple, and this could not be achieved if it were necessary to admit evidence in proof of the factual circumstances necessary to determine whether in its substance the arbitration award violates public policy or fair practices. For this reason as well, the Parliament restricted the state court to just one source of information, namely the arbitration record, i.e. written documents whose consideration and assessment generally do not entail any difficulties which could prolong the proceeding. If there were no such restriction, with respect to defects in an arbitration award as discussed here, there would be no difference between the two types of proceedings in the state court, which would be inconsistent with the one-track nature of the proceeding, which is consistently implemented in Polish procedural law.

Data wydania: 29-09-1948 | Sygnatura: Wa C 162/48

Key issues: arbitration agreement, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award

id: 20084

Polish Supreme Court ruling dated 2 November 1938 Case No. C II 280/38

1. Civil Procedure Code Art. 150, which permits service at night only upon prior order by the director of the court, does not apply to arbitration procedure, where the general regulation of Civil Procedure Code Art. 500 §1 provides only that the arbitration court shall serve copies of the award on the parties, against written proof of service, but does not prescribe the manner of service.

2. Obligations Code Art. 82 permits an agreement to pay a specific sum of money in the event of failure to perform an obligation, and thus the arbitration court did not violate public policy by ruling on a monetary penalty....

3. The allegation that the arbitration award does not explain the grounds for monetary obligations is unjustified, because the parties released the arbitration court from the duty to provide a justification for the award.

Data wydania: 02-11-1938 | Sygnatura: C II 280/38

Key issues: arbitration agreement, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20077

Polish Supreme Court ruling dated 24 October 1938 Case No. C II 800/38

1. There are grounds for setting aside the arbitration award under Civil Procedure Code Art. 503 §1(4) because the award issued without enclosing the map for partition of the plot was unintelligible, and because it exceeds the bounds of the arbitration clause....

2. The allegation in the cassation appeal that because of exceeding the bounds of the arbitration clause the arbitration award should be set aside only in part cannot be upheld, because all of the orders issued in the given case by the arbitration court are closely interconnected, and they cannot be distinguished without intruding into the consideration of the case on the merits, and the state courts have no authority to review arbitration awards on the merits.

Data wydania: 24-10-1938 | Sygnatura: C II 800/38

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20076

Polish Supreme Court ruling dated 18 March 1938 Case No. C II 2989/37

1. Arbitrators are not bound by provisions of procedural law, as they may specify the procedure to be followed within their own discretion (Civil Procedure Code Art. 494 §2), nor are they bound by provisions of substantive law in deciding the case.

2. An arbitration court rules in accordance with general principles of equity and fair commercial practice, and may not be constrained by provisions of substantive or procedural law, and thus the Parliament provides in Civil Procedure Code Art. 503 for the ability to set aside an arbitration award only in exceptional instances, and such provisions are subject to a strict interpretation, not an expansive interpretation.

3. The state court is not competent to delve into allegations of violation of provisions of substantive law or general provisions of procedural law applicable in a judicial proceeding, nor does it have the right to enter into the merits of the resolution by the arbitration court....

Data wydania: 18-03-1938 | Sygnatura: C II 2989/37

Key issues: arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20073

Polish Supreme Court ruling dated 29 November 1937 Case No. C II 1252/37

1. Civil Procedure Code Art. 503 §1 is limited to an enumeration of the grounds for setting aside an arbitration award, while Art. 505 requires the regulations concerning a proceeding initiated by a statement of claim to be applied in a proceeding upon a petition to set aside an arbitration award. It follows from this that Civil Procedure Code Art. 408 §2 and Art. 437 concerning partial setting aside of a judgment are also applicable to arbitration awards.

2. The substance of the arbitration award determines whether in the given instance it may be set aside in part and to what extent, obviously within the bounds of Civil Procedure Code Art. 503 §1. Partial setting aside of an award will not be permissible if the specific parts of the award are interconnected in such a way that none of them may be removed from the others without materially deforming the whole. If, however, the arbitration court exceeded the bounds of the arbitration clause (Civil Procedure Code Art. 503 §1(4)), and the ruling in this regard may without harm be separated from the rest of the award, there is no barrier preventing partial setting aside of the award.

3. The parties could supplement the arbitration clause during the hearing before the arbitration court, but because of the requirement for written form of the clause (Civil Procedure Code Art. 480 §2), such supplementation would also have to be made in that form, and thus in the minutes signed by the parties.

4. The state court is competent to consider only formal grounds for setting aside an arbitration award, except that it will also consider in substantive terms whether the award violates public policy or good practice (Civil Procedure Code Art. 503 §1(4)).

5. Waiver of the right to challenge the award would have to be express in order to be effective, and the plaintiff’s statement that it accepts the award does not satisfy this requirement, and in any event was made to the arbitration court and not to the defendant.

Data wydania: 29-11-1937 | Sygnatura: C II 1252/37

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20070

Polish Supreme Court ruling dated 6 May 1936 Case No. C I 1914/35

1. Under the Civil Procedure Code, a proceeding to set aside an arbitration award is a sui generis proceeding, but, as it appears from Art. 503, it is similar to a cassation proceeding, because of the strict enumeration in this article of the grounds for setting aside an award, and then by the procedure in the courts of first and second instance, when the courts are authorized only to determine whether the arbitration award contains violations provided for in Art. 503. Thus amending and expanding the grounds for the petition cannot be permitted, and only the allegations raised in the petition may be considered.

2. An arbitration award should be justified in accordance with Civil Procedure Code Art. 498(5), but it does not follow from this provision that the justification must be issued at the same time as the operative wording of the award. … In accordance with the final paragraph of Civil Procedure Code Art. 499 §2, an award signed by a majority of the arbitrators has the same force as one signed by all of the arbitrators.

3. In Civil Procedure Code Art. 503 the Parliament provided that an arbitration award may be set aside only in exceptional circumstances, and these provisions are not subject to an expansive interpretation. Thus the state court is not authorized to enter into consideration of allegations concerning violation of provisions of substantive law or general provisions of procedural law applicable in a judicial proceeding, nor does it have a right to enter into a determination of the fairness of the award or the correctness of the factual findings or grounds on which the award was based.

Data wydania: 06-05-1936 | Sygnatura: C I 1914/35

Key issues: arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20061

Polish Supreme Court ruling dated 22 October 1935 Case No. C II 984/35

1. Civil Procedure Code Art. 503 provides for the ability to set aside an arbitration award only in exceptional circumstances, and such provisions are subject to strict rather than expansive interpretation. As a result, in case of doubt, the award should be maintained in force rather than set aside.

2. It follows from the concept of “resolution” that an award by an arbitration court should be of a type that definitively ends the dispute, and from which it will be apparent in what manner the dispute was resolved, so that any doubts or potential further disputes in this respect are excluded.

Data wydania: 22-10-1935 | Sygnatura: C II 984/35

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20056

Polish Supreme Court ruling dated 11 October 1935 Case No. C I 339/35

1. Award of the costs of the proceeding by the arbitration court, even though not mentioned in the arbitration clause, does not invalidate the award if it was made at the request of both parties, expressed in writings submitted to the arbitration court, as in this way the clause was supplemented in compliance with the requirements as to form in Civil Procedure Code Art. 480.

2. Determination of the amount of the costs of the proceeding before the arbitration court rests with the arbitration court and lies outside the bounds of review by the state court (Civil Procedure Code Art. 502 and 503).

3. Discovery of the forgery of a document may be grounds for setting aside an arbitration award. ... The view that forgery of a document must be evidenced by a judgment is not founded on any provision of law, and more specifically is contrary to Civil Procedure Code Art. 445 §1(1) and thus contrary to Art. 503 §1(5).

Data wydania: 11-10-1935 | Sygnatura: C I 339/35

Key issues: arbitration agreement, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20054

Polish Supreme Court ruling dated 7 March 1935 Case No. C II 2371/34

A petition under Civil Procedure Code Art. 504 filed with an improper court does not interrupt preclusion, even if the deadline of one week following dismissal is essentially met, if the one-month period for filing the petition expired prior to filing of the petition with the proper court. Civil Procedure Code Art. 505 refers to the proceeding upon a properly filed petition, not the period for filing a petition to set aside an arbitration award and preclusion of such period.

Data wydania: 07-03-1935 | Sygnatura: C II 2371/34

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20050

Polish Supreme Court ruling dated 8 February 1935 Case No. C III 778/34

1. The violations referred to in Civil Procedure Code Art. 503 may occur with respect to only a portion of the claims considered by the arbitration court, and in such case they will also justify only partial setting aside, because in order to exert such effect the defects mentioned in Art. 503 must affect the issuance of the ruling. Thus, as partial setting aside is generally permissible, it must be left to the discretion of the party whether it wishes to exercise the right arising under Art. 503 in full or in part. Exclusion of a certain portion of the ruling in the petition may not be undertaken solely in such a manner that partial setting aside of the arbitration award cannot be dictated by considerations of litigation defence.

2. Because in the dispute before the arbitration court, the defendant [i.e. the claimant in the arbitration case] could have standing only under the principle of an assignment for collection, Civil Code § 404 is applicable. Because under this provision the debtor may assert the arbitration clause also against the new creditor, the clause must be binding also on the new creditor.

3. Depriving a party of the ability to defend its rights is not absolute grounds for setting aside an arbitration award, but such violation will result in setting aside the award only if it affected the issuance of the award.

Data wydania: 08-02-1935 | Sygnatura: C III 778/34

Key issues: arbitration agreement, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20049

Polish Supreme Court ruling dated 4 October 1934 Case No. C II 1861/34

1. From the perspective of Austrian civil procedure regulations, failure to submit the original arbitration clause to the arbitration court does not justify ineffectiveness of the arbitration award, as this result follows under § 595(1) of the [former Austrian] Civil Procedure Code only from lack of an arbitration clause.

2. The state court is not a higher instance with respect to the arbitration court, and thus determinations made by the arbitration court within its discretion may not be appealed against.

3. The lack of justification of an arbitration award is not included in § 595 of the [former Austrian] Civil Procedure Code as grounds for ineffectiveness of the arbitration award.

Data wydania: 04-10-1934 | Sygnatura: C II 1861/34

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20046

Polish Supreme Court ruling dated 6 October 1933 Case No. C I 1157/33

If the parties do not appear at the time set for announcement of the arbitration award, or if the award was not announced to the parties, the award is deemed to be announced on the last day of the period set for issuance of the award.

Data wydania: 06-10-1933 | Sygnatura: C I 1157/33

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20039

Polish Supreme Court ruling dated 30 September 1931 Case No. III 1 Rw 1159/31

The issue raised in the review of what will happen if the Land Office refuses permission to acquire the real estate identified in the arbitration award does not fall within the purview of the courts in this dispute, as it concerns the correctness of the arbitration award on the merits, and comprises an allegation of the erroneous assessment of the award, and therefore it cannot justify any of the grounds of ineffectiveness from §595 of the [former] Austrian Civil Procedure Code.

Data wydania: 30-09-1931 | Sygnatura: III 1 Rw 1159/31

Key issues: arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20312

Polish Supreme Court ruling dated 4 February 1931 Case No. III 1 Rw 2220/30

The deadline under §596 par. 2 of the [former Austrian] Civil Procedure Code for challenging an arbitration award is undoubtedly a preclusive deadline, which is even stricter than a statute of limitations. If in the case of the latter the limitations period is interrupted by filing a petition that is duly supported (Civil Code §1497), then it follows from the nature of a preclusive deadline that failure to support the petition (in the given case) within a period of 3 months results in loss of the right to challenge the award.

Data wydania: 04-02-1931 | Sygnatura: III 1 Rw 2220/30

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20120

Polish Supreme Court ruling dated 5 July 1929 Case No. III. 2. C. 222/29

1. It cannot be assumed that the parties, when not only certain of their rights and obligations arising out of the legal act in question are challenged, but the legal act as such, did not intend to make use of the assistance of the arbitration court. Therefore, despite the invalidity (not to mention the ineffectiveness) of the deed itself, the arbitration clause, only mechanically connected to the deed, remains in force.

2. Unless otherwise provided by the parties, the arbitration court is not bound by procedural regulations, particularly the provisions of the [former German] Civil Procedure Code, when hearing the case submitted to it.

3. An arbitration award must set forth the reasons; that is, it must contain an objective justification for the operative wording of the award issued. Whether such justification is accurate, exhaustive or consistent with the state of facts cannot be reviewed by the common court under §1041 of the [former German] Civil Procedure Code, because it is not an appellate instance with respect to the arbitration court.

Data wydania: 05-07-1929 | Sygnatura: III. 2. C. 222/29

Key issues: arbitration agreement, arbitration procedure, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20018

Polish Supreme Court ruling dated 26 October 1927 Case No. III Rw 1842/27

In a petition referred to as an “invalidity petition”..., the petitioner asserted grounds for ineffectiveness of an arbitration award under [former Austrian] Civil Procedure Code § 595(2), but did not seek to set aside the award but demanded statutorily impermissible amendment of the award on the merits. It follows that he did not assert at that time a petition to set aside the arbitration award (§ 596(1)), for which the code provides a period of three months from service of the arbitration award (§ 596(2)). … Thus if it was not until the hearing that the petitioner amended the relief sought and demanded that the award be set aside, it was only then, long after three months from service, that he asserted a proper petition to set aside the award. At that time he had already lost the right to assert the petition.

Data wydania: 26-10-1927 | Sygnatura: III Rw 1842/27

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20008

Warsaw Court of Appeal judgment dated 24 September 2014 Case No. I ACa 348/14

1. A petition to set aside an arbitration award is an extraordinary measure of judicial review by the state court of the activity of the arbitration court. It is a special legal measure combining the features of extraordinary review (against an arbitration award that is legally final, at least formally) and a claim seeking to modify the legal status brought about by the arbitration award. However, it is not an appellate measure, and the state court reviewing the petition generally will not examine the resolution of the arbitration court on the merits, and in particular will not review whether there is a foundation for the award under the cited facts or whether the facts were properly established.

2. Civil Procedure Code Art. 1206 §1(4) refers to the fundamental rules of procedure before the arbitration court, which should be understood as limiting the possibility to set aside an arbitration award only to those instances which resulted in violation of the principles of a fair trial or procedural violations important enough that they could have influenced the arbitration award, for example violation of the principle of the equality of the parties, or a complete failure to admit evidence. This situation did not occur in the proceeding before the arbitration court, as the objection by the petition referred to the arbitrators’ failure to comply with the 30-day limit for closing the proceeding in the case, late issuance of the award and service on the petitioner, and failure to comply with informational obligations with respect to the petitioner.

3. Fundamental principles of the legal order should be understood as fundamental constitutional principles concerning the socio-economic system, as well as the leading principles governing specific areas of substantive and procedural law. Thus only norms that are mandatorily binding and to which fundamental importance is ascribed may justify reliance on the public policy clause. This clause is not applied to correct all irregularities and defects in arbitration awards, but should protect the integrity of public policy.

Data wydania: 24-09-201 | Sygnatura: I ACa 348/14

Key issues: arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 20391

Adamus Rafał

Bankruptcy with a Possibility of Arrangement and Arbitration [Original title: Upadłość z szansą na układ a arbitraż]

Jur. 2011, No. 6, p. 20-28

Key issues: arbitration agreement, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31012

Allerhand Maurycy

Competence of the State Court in Connection with the Arbitration Proceedings [Original title: Właściwość sądu państwowego w związku z postępowaniem przed sądem polubownym.]

PPC 1934, No. 4, p. 111-113

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30034

Almoguera Jesús

Setting Aside of Arbitral Awards in Recent Case Law in Spain

[in:] B. Gessel-Kalinowska vel Kalisz (ed.), The Challenges and the Future of Commercial and Investment Arbitration. Liber Amicorum Professor Jerzy Rajski, Warsaw 2015, p. 251-271

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31414

Apfelbaum Ignacy

Remarks on the Provisions of the Civil Procedure Code on Arbitration [Original title: Uwagi do postanowień k.p.c. o sądach polubownych]

Nowa Palestra 1933, No. 3, p. 11-17

Key issues: arbitrator, arbitration agreement, arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30036

Asłanowicz Marcin

Amendment to the Fifth Part of the Code of Civil Procedure – the End or the Beginning of Changes? [Original title: Nowelizacja części piątej KPC – koniec, czy początek zmian?]

e-Przegląd Arbitrażowy 2015, No. 1-2, p. 34-37

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 31780

Asłanowicz Marcin

Article 1206 (1) (2) of the Polish Civil Procedure Code as a Ground for a Petition to Set Aside an Award [Original title: Art. 1206 par. 1 pkt 2 KPC jako przesłanka skargi o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego]

e-Przegląd Arbitrażowy 2015, No. 3-4, p. 33-38

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31803

Asłanowicz Marcin

Loss of the Arbitrator’s Legitimacy to Perform his/her Function [Original title: Utrata przez arbitra legitymacji do dalszego wykonywania swojej funkcji]

PPH 2014, No. 11, p. 22-27

Key issues: arbitrator, arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31309

Asłanowicz Marcin

Truncated Arbitral Tribunals [Original title: Kadłubowe zespoły orzekające]

PUG 2015, No. 3, p. 9-16

Key issues: arbitrator, arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31363

Balbiano di Colcavagno Pietro

Setting Aside and Refusing the Recognition and Enforcement of the Awards in Italy: Grounds and Procedural Issues [Original title: Uchylenie oraz odmowa uznania i stwierdzenia wykonalności wyroku arbitrażowego we Włoszech - przesłanki i kwestie procesowe]

Arbitration e-Review 2014, No. 1-2, p. 51-60

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 31281

Barański Jakub

Lost Opportunity – Corporate Arbitration and the Amendment of the Arbitration Law [Original title: Utracona okazja – arbitraż korporacyjny a nowelizacja prawa arbitrażowego]

PEP 2015, No 12 (138), p. 41-43

Key issues: arbitrability of dispute, arbitration agreement, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 31507

Bareła Monika

Judicial Review of Arbitration Proceedings in Light of International Practice [Original title: Sądowa kontrola postępowania arbitrażowego z perspektywy doświadczeń międzynarodowych]

Stud.Prawn. 2013, No. 1, p. 35-67

Key issues: New York Convention, investment arbitration, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 31189

Bartz Antoni Władysław

Remarks on the Application for Setting Aside of an Arbitration Award in the Civil Procedure Code [Original title: Uwagi nad skargą o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego w k.p.c.]

Głos Prawa 1937, No. 1-2, p. 40-52

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30038

Bartz Antoni Władysław

Remarks on the Object of the Application for Setting Aside of an Arbitration Award in the Civil Procedure Code [Original title: Uwagi o przedmiocie skargi o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego w k.p.c.]

Głos Prawa 1937, No. 5-6, p. 289-294

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30039

Pörnbacher Karl, Baur Sebastian

The New French Arbitration Law, the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules and IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration

Biul. Arb. 2010-2011, No. 4, p. 52-64

Key issues: general works, state court assistance, arbitrator, arbitration agreement, arbitration procedure, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30992

Zembra Mykola, Bazan Wojciech

Challenging of Arbitral Awards in Ukraine [Original title: Skarga o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego na Ukrainie]

Arbitration e-Review 2014, No. 1-2, p. 71-78

Key issues: arbitrability of dispute, arbitration agreement, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31282

Bieniak Michał

Premises for Setting Aside of an Arbitration Award – Commentary on the Supreme Court Judgement of 28.4.2000, II CKN 267/00 [Original title: Przesłanki uchylenia wyroku sądu polubownego - glosa do wyroku SN z 28.4.2000 r., II CKN 267/00]

MoP 2002, No. 2, p. 82-84

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30192

Błaszczak Łukasz

Application for Setting Aside of an Arbitration Award [Original title: Skarga o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego]

Pr.Sp. 2005, No. 2, p. 28-35

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30457

Błaszczak Łukasz

Arbitration Award in Civil Proceedings [Original title: Wyrok sądu polubownego w postępowaniu cywilnym]

Warszawa 2010, pp. 505

Key issues: settlement before arbitral tribunal, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 30886

Błaszczak Łukasz

Common Court Supervision over the Arbitration Court's Actions, part 1 [Original title: Nadzór sądu powszechnego nad działalnością sądu polubownego, cz. 1]

Pr.Sp. 2006, No. 3, p. 35-42

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30455

Błaszczak Łukasz

Common Court Supervision over the Arbitration Court's Actions, part 2 [Original title: Nadzór sądu powszechnego nad działalnością sądu polubownego, cz. 2

Pr.Sp. 2006, No. 4, p. 32-40

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30882

Błaszczak Łukasz

Relation between the Arbitration Court and the Common Court – Determination of Common Grounds [Original title: Relacje pomiędzy sądem polubownym a sądem powszechnym – określenie wzajemnych płaszczyzn]

PEP 2006, No. 9

Key issues: state court assistance, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30456

Dunin-Wąsowicz Jan K., Boykin James H.

Judicial Review of Arbitral Awards in the United States - the Uncertain Future of "Manifest Disregard of the Law" [Original title: Sądowa kontrola wyroków arbitrażowych w Stanach Zjednoczonych - niepewna przyszłość doktryny „rażącego naruszenia prawa”]

Arbitration e-Review 2014, No. 1-2, p. 42-50

Key issues: New York Convention, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 31280

Brekoulakis Stavros

Public Policy Rules in English Arbitration Law

[in:] B. Gessel-Kalinowska vel Kalisz (ed.), The Challenges and the Future of Commercial and Investment Arbitration. Liber Amicorum Professor Jerzy Rajski, Warsaw 2015, p. 292-314

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 31416

Pazdan Maksymilian, Sołtysiński Stanisław, Wardyński Tomasz, Włodyka Stanisław, Okolski Józef, Całus Andrzej

A Commemorative Volume for 60 years of the Court of Arbitration at the Polish Chamber of Commerce in Warsaw [Original title: Księga pamiątkowa 60-lecia Sądu Arbitrażowego przy Krajowej Izbie Gospodarczej w Warszawie]

Warszawa 2010, pp. 887

Key issues: New York Convention, general works, state court assistance, arbitrability of dispute, investment arbitration, arbitrator, arbitration agreement, arbitration procedure, jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal, settlement before arbitral tribunal, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 30952

Carpentieri Leonardo

Arbitration in France – Some New Trends

ADR. Arbitraż i Mediacja 2015, No. 1, p. 13-24

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 31374

Mourre Alexis, Chessa Valentine

A Comparative Approach to the Standard of Review of Arbitral Awards under Substantive Public Policy

[in:] B. Gessel-Kalinowska vel Kalisz (ed.), The Challenges and the Future of Commercial and Investment Arbitration. Liber Amicorum Professor Jerzy Rajski, Warsaw 2015, p. 379-383

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 31422

Comi Urszula

Arbitration – Comparative Look on the Polish and French Statutory Law Regulations [Original title: Arbitraż - prawnoporównawcze spojrzenie na regulacje ustawodawstwa polskiego i francuskiego]

[in:] A. Garnuszek, L. Mazur, A. Orzeł (eds.), Quo Vadis, Arbitrażu? Quo Vadis, Arbitration?, Warszawa 2013, p. 45-73

Key issues: arbitrability of dispute, arbitrator, arbitration agreement, arbitration procedure, jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award

id: 31205

Czech Konrad

Commentary to the Supreme Court Judgement dated 20 March 2015, II CSK 352/14 [Original title: Glosa do wyroku Sądu Najwyższego z 20 marca 2015 r., II CSK 352/14]

OSP 2015, No. 11, item 104, p. 1550-1559

Key issues: arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31500

Dasser Felix, Wójtowicz Piotr

Challenges of Swiss Arbitral Awards – Updated and Extended Statistical Data as of 2015

ASA Bulletin 2016, Vol. 34, Issue 2, p. 280-300

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31789

Diaby Anna

Deprivation of a Party of the Right to Have a Case Heard by an Impartial Court as the Basis for Setting Aside of an Arbitral Award (Article 1206 § 2 p. 2 of the Polish Civil Procedure Code)[Original title: Pozbawienie strony prawa do rozpoznania sprawy przez bezstronny sąd jako podstawa do uchylenia wyroku sądu polubownego (art. 1206 § 2 pkt 2 k.p.c.)]

Biul.Arb. - Młody Arbitraż 2015, No. 22, p. 154-166

Key issues: arbitrator, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31333

Dubiński Lech, Stępień Caroline

Means of Challenging of Arbitration Awards in Poland and in France. Has the Last Amendment of French Arbitration Contributed Towards Similarity of Regulations in Both Countries? [Original title: Środki zaskarżenia wyroków sądów polubownych w Polsce i we Francji. Czy ostatnia nowelizacja francuskiego arbitrażu wpłynęła na zbliżenie regulacji w obu krajach?]

[in:] A. Garnuszek, L. Mazur, A. Orzeł (eds.), Quo Vadis, Arbitrażu? Quo Vadis, Arbitration?, Warszawa 2013, p. 107-130

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31208

Durbas Maciej

Transfer of a Case by a Common Court to an Arbitral Tribunal (Remission Proceedings) – Article 1209 Code of Civil Procedure [Original title: Przekazanie sprawy sądowi polubownemu przez sąd powszechny (postępowanie remisyjne) – art. 1209 KPC]

[in:] Jelonek-Jarco Barbara, Kos Rafał, Zawadzka Julita (eds), Usus magister est optimus. Legal Papers Dedicated to Professor Andrzej Kubas [Original title: Usus magister est optimus. Rozprawy prawnicze ofiarowane Profesorowi Andrzejowi Kubasowi], Warszawa 2016, p. 657-667

Key issues: arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31541

Zawicki Kamil, Durbas Maciej, Gąsiorowski Kuba

Poland – The Supreme Court Judgements and Decisions of Appellate Courts

[in:] Alexander J. Bělohlávek, Naděžda Rozehnalová (eds.), Czech (& Central European) Yearbook of Arbitration 2015, Vol. V, Interaction of Arbitration and Courts, New York 2015, p. 643-654

Key issues: arbitrator, arbitration agreement, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 31368

Durbas Maciej, Kos Rafał

The Arbitrators' (Perceived) Power to Revise a Contract vs. the Power of the Public Policy Clause

[in:] Christian Klausegger, Peter Klein, Florian Kremslehner, Alexander Petsche, Nikolaus Pitkowitz, Jenny Power, Irene Welser, Gerold Zeiler (eds.), Austrian Yearbook on International Arbitration 2014, Vienna 2014, p. 135-147

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 31291

Ereciński Tadeusz

Arbitration and State Courts [Original title: Arbitraż a sądownictwo państwowe]

PUG 1994, No. 2, p. 2-8

Key issues: state court assistance, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30220

Ereciński Tadeusz

Basis for the Petition to Set Aside Arbitration Award (De Lege Ferenda Remarks) [Original title: Podstawa skargi o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego (uwagi de lege ferenda)]

[in:] Anna Smoczyńska (ed.), Polish Private Law in the Time of Changes. An Anniversary Book Dedicated to Professor Jerzy Młynarczyk [Polskie prawo prywatne w dobie przemian. Księga jubileuszowa dedykowana Profesorowi Jerzemu Młynarczykowi], Gdańsk 2005, p. 41-53

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30408

Ereciński Tadeusz

Lack of Arbitrator’s Independence and Impartiality and Grounds for Setting Aside an Arbitral Award [Original title: Brak bezstronności i niezależności arbitra a podstawy skargi o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego]

[in:] Grzegorczyk Paweł, Knoppek Krzysztof, Walasik Marcin (eds.), Civil Procedure. Study-Codification-Practice. A Commemorative Volume Dedicated to Professor Feliks Zedler [Proces cywilny. Nauka-Kodyfikacja-Praktyka. Księga jubileuszowa dedykowana Profesorowi Feliksowi Zedlerowi], Warszawa 2012, p. 845-857

Key issues: arbitrator, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31463

Ereciński Tadeusz

Setting Aside by a State Court of an Award Issued in International Commercial Arbitration [Original title: Uchylenie przez sąd państwowy orzeczenia wydanego w międzynarodowym arbitrażu handlowym]

[in:] Ewa Łętowska (ed.), Procedure and Law. A Commemorative Volume in Honour of Prof. Jerzy Jodłowski [Proces i prawo. Księga pamiątkowa ku czci profesora Jerzego Jodłowskiego], Wrocław 1989, p. 77-96

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30407

Ereciński Tadeusz, Weitz Karol

Shortening the Course of Post-Arbitration Litigation – Remarks De Lege Ferenda

[in:] B. Gessel-Kalinowska vel Kalisz (ed.), The Challenges and the Future of Commercial and Investment Arbitration. Liber Amicorum Professor Jerzy Rajski, Warsaw 2015, p. 330-346

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 31418

Falkiewicz Krzysztof

Common Court Cognition with Respect to Its Power to Control Arbitrary Court Rulings - Selected Notions of Jurisdiction [Original title: Zakres kognicji sądu powszechnego przy kontroli wyroków sądów polubownych - wybrane zagadnienia w praktyce orzeczniczej]

[in:] M. Łaszczuk (chair), M. Furtek, S. Pieckowski, J. Poczobut, A. Szumański, M. Tomaszewski (eds.), Arbitration and Mediation. A Commemorative Volume Dedicated to Dr Andrzej Tynel [Arbitraż i mediacja. Księga jubileuszowa dedykowana doktorowi Andrzejowi Tynelowi], Warszawa 2012, p. 138-152

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31083

Fenichel Zygmunt

Competence of the State Court in Connection with Arbitration Proceedings [Original title: Właściwość sądu państwowego w związku z postępowaniem przed sądem polubownym.]

PPC 1934, No. 4, p. 110-111

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30063

Fenichel Zygmunt

What Procedure Should be Applied in Proceedings Before State Courts in Arbitration Cases? [Original title: W jakim trybie toczyć się winno postępowanie przed sądem państwowym w sprawach sądownictwa polubownego?]

PPC 1934, No. 18, p. 571-572

Key issues: state court assistance, arbitrator, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30061

Kolber Joanna, Fierens Jean-Pierre

The 2013 Developments in Belgian Arbitration Law

ADR. Arbitraż i Mediacja 2015, No. 1, p. 26-38

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 31375

Fornalik Jakub, Szczudlik Katarzyna

Inconsistency with the Pacta Sunt Servanda Principle as a Ground for Setting Aside of an Arbitration Award [Original title: Sprzeczność z zasadą pacta sunt servanda jako podstawa uchylenia wyroku sądu polubownego]

PPH 2016, No 1, s. 40-45

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31509

Franusz Anna

Commentary to the Judgment of the Supreme Court – Civil Chamber Dated 3 September 2009, I CSK 53/09 [Original title: Glosa do wyroku Sądu Najwyższego - Izby Cywilnej z dnia 3 września 2009 r., I CSK 53/09]

OSP 2011, No. 10, p. 761-765

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31016

Franusz Anna

Impact of Declaration of Bankruptcy of an Entrepreneur on Arbitration Proceedings [Original title: Wpływ ogłoszenia upadłości przedsiębiorcy na postępowanie arbitrażowe]

Studia Prawnoustrojowe 2011, No. 14, p. 283-293

Key issues: arbitration agreement, arbitration procedure, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 31121

Frąckowiak Józef

The Finality of State Court Judgments and Arbitral Awards

[in:] B. Gessel-Kalinowska vel Kalisz (ed.), The Challenges and the Future of Commercial and Investment Arbitration. Liber Amicorum Professor Jerzy Rajski, Warsaw 2015, p. 347-354

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31419

Frątczak Klaudia, Mikołajczyk Natalia

Reform of the French Code of Civil Procedure - Revolutionary Changes in Arbitration Law [Original title: Nowelizacja francuskiego Kodeksu Postępowania Cywilnego: Rewolucyjne zmiany w prawie arbitrażowym]

Arbitration e-Review 2011, No. 2, p. 38-41

Key issues: general works, state court assistance, arbitrator, arbitration agreement, arbitration procedure, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30985

Frejowski Sebastian

Binding of an Arbitration Tribunal by the State Court Ruling That Recognized or Enforced a Prior Arbitration Tribunal Award [Original title: Związanie sądu arbitrażowego orzeczeniem sądu powszechnego, który uznał lub stwierdził wykonalność wyroku sądu polubownego]

Glosa 2013, No. 2, p. 63-67

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 31154

Łaszczuk Maciej, Pieckowski Sylwester, Poczobut Jerzy, Szumański Andrzej, Tomaszewski Maciej, Furtek Marek

Arbitration and Mediation. A Commemorative Volume Dedicated to Dr Andrzej Tynel [Original tilte: Arbitraż i mediacja. Księga jubileuszowa dedykowana doktorowi Andrzejowi Tynelowi]

Warszawa 2012, pp. 732

Key issues: New York Convention, general works, state court assistance, arbitrability of dispute, investment arbitration, arbitrator, arbitration agreement, arbitration procedure, jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal, settlement before arbitral tribunal, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 31075

Garnuszek Anita, Orzeł Aleksandra

Enforceability of Multi-tiered Dispute Resolution Clauses under Polish Law

Arbitration Bulletin - Young Arbitration 2016, No. 24, p. 166-180

Key issues: arbitration agreement, jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31565

Zawicki Kamil, Gąsiorowski Kuba, Matejczyk Magdalena

Poland – the Supreme Court Judgments

[in:] Bělohlávek Alexander J., Rozehnalová Naděžda (eds), Czech Yearbook of International Law. International Dispute Resolution, The Hague 2016, Vol. VII, p. 213-223

Key issues: New York Convention, arbitration agreement, arbitration procedure, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 31552

Gembiś Łukasz

Manifest Disregard of the Law as a Ground for Vacatur Domestic and International Arbitral Awards in the United States [Original title: Rażące naruszenie prawa jako podstawa do uchylenia krajowego oraz międzynarodowego wyroku arbitrażowego w USA]

Arbitration e-Review 2014, No. 1-2, p. 25-41

Key issues: New York Convention, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 31279

Gessel-Kalinowska vel Kalisz Beata

Diagnosis for Arbitration. Functioning of Arbitration Law and the Directions of Postulated Changes [Original title: Diagnoza arbitrażu. Funkcjonowanie prawa o arbitrażu i kierunki postulowanych zmian]

Wrocław 2014, pp. 593

Key issues: New York Convention, general works, arbitrability of dispute, arbitrator, arbitration agreement, arbitration procedure, jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal, settlement before arbitral tribunal, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 31452

Gessel-Kalinowska vel Kalisz Beata

Setting Aside an Arbitration Award and Composition of the Arbitral Tribunal in Case of Retrial [Original title: Uchylenie wyroku arbitrażowego a skład sądu polubownego w przypadku ponownego rozpoznania sprawy]

[in:] Jelonek-Jarco Barbara, Kos Rafał, Zawadzka Julita (eds), Usus magister est optimus. Legal Papers Dedicated to Professor Andrzej Kubas [Original title: Usus magister est optimus. Rozprawy prawnicze ofiarowane Profesorowi Andrzejowi Kubasowi], Warszawa 2016, p. 669-677

Key issues: arbitrator, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31542

Gessel-Kalinowska vel Kalisz Beata

UNCITRAL Model Law: Composition of the Arbitration Tribunal Re-considering the Case upon Setting Aside of the Original Arbitration Award

Journal of International Arbitration 2017, Vol. 34, Issue 1, p. 17-33

Key issues: arbitrator, arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31828

Głodowski Włodzimierz

Arbitration and a Petition to Set Aside an Award in the Context of the Constitutional Principle of the Right to be Heard by a Court of Law and of the Principle of the Court Appeal Mechanism [Original title: Sądownictwo polubowne oraz skarga o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego w aspekcie konstytucyjnej zasady prawa do sądu oraz zasady dwuinstancyjności postępowania]

[in:] Łukasz Błaszczak (ed.), Civil Court Proceeding Constitutionalisation [Konstytucjonalizacja postępowania cywilnego], Wrocław 2015, p. 381-391

Key issues: arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31473

Głodowski Włodzimierz

Auxiliary Intervention in Proceedings Initiated by an Application for Setting Aside an Arbitration Award [Original title: Interwencja uboczna w postępowaniu ze skargi o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego]

[in:] Dorota Czura-Kalinowska, Mediation and Arbitration [Mediacja i arbitraż], Poznań 2009, p. 233-246

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30730

Głodowski Włodzimierz

Formal Requirements for the Application for Setting Aside an Arbitration Award [Original title: Wymogi formalne skargi o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego]

[in:] Jan Olszewski (ed.), Arbitration and Mediation - Practical Aspects of Application of Provisions. Conference materials (Iwonicz-Zdrój 18-20.10.2007) [Arbitraż i mediacja. Praktyczne aspekty stosowania przepisów. Materiały konferencyjne (Iwonicz Zdrój, 18-20.10.2007 r.)], Rzeszów 2007, p. 113-123

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30120

Głodowski Włodzimierz

Petition to Set Aside an Arbitration Award [Original title: Skarga o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego]

Warszawa-Poznań 2014, pp. 338

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31494

Głodowski Włodzimierz

Proceedings Initiated by a Petition to Set Aside an Arbitration Award [Original title: Postępowanie na skutek wniesienia skargi o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego]

[in:] Henryk Dolecki, Kinga Flaga-Gieruszyńska (ed.), Evolution of the Polish Civil Proceedings in the Light of Political, Social and Economic Transformations. Conference Materials from the All-Poland Congress of Civil Law Faculties, Szczecin-Niechorze 28-30.9.2007, Warsaw 2009 [Ewolucja polskiego postępowania cywilnego wobec przemian politycznych, społecznych i gospodarczych. Materiały konferencyjne Ogólnopolskiego Zjazdu Katedr Postępowania Cywilnego Szczecin-Niechorze 28-30.9.2007 r., Warszawa 2009], p. 171-181

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30695

Goldwag Naum

Decisions of the Arbitration Court. Legal Remedies Available to the Parties. [Original title: Postanowienia sądu polubownego Przysługujące stronom środki prawne.]

Pal. 1936, No. 7-8, p. 601-606

Key issues: arbitration procedure, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30069

Golędzinowski Piotr

The Consequences of Setting Aside an Arbitral Award Following a Final Decision Ending the Procedure for Declaring the Award Enforceable [Original title: Skutki uchylenia wyroku sądu polubownego po prawomocnym zakończeniu postępowania o stwierdzenie wykonalności]

Arbitration e-Review 2014, No. 1-2, p. 6-12

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award

id: 31277

Gorywoda Łukasz

Institutionalization of an Arbitral Appeal Mechanism – American Arbitration Association's new Optional Appellate Arbitration Rules [Original title: Instytucjonalizacja dwuinstancyjności postępowania arbitrażowego – apelacja arbitrażowa według nowych reguł American Arbitration Association]

PPH 2015, No. 4, p. 17-22

Key issues: arbitration agreement, arbitration procedure, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 31364

Grabska-Luberadzka Katarzyna

The Petition to Set Aside an Arbitral Award and the Practice of the Court of Arbitration for Sport at the Polish Olympic Committee [Original title: Skarga o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego a praktyka Trybunału Arbitrażowego ds. Sportu przy Polskim Komitecie Olimpijskim]

Arbitration e-Review 2014, No. 1-2, p. 13-24

Key issues: arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31278

Hołub-Śniadach Olga

Arbitration Agreements and the Community Law. A Commentary to the ECJ’s judgement in case C-126/97 Eco Swiss China Time Ltd vs. Benetton International NV [Original title: Umowy o arbitraż a prawo wspólnotowe. Glosa do orzeczenia ETS w sprawie C-126/97 Eco Swiss China Time Ltd przeciwko Benetton International NV]

Gdańskie Studia Prawnicze - Przegląd Orzecznictwa 2005, No. 1-2, p. 251-258

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31058

Horváth Éva

(How) Are 'Ill' Awards Curable

[in:] Sylwester Pieckowski (chair), Piotr Nowaczyk, Jerzy Poczobut, Andrzej Szumański, Andrzej Tynel (ed.), Polish and International Commercial Arbitration at the Threshold of the 21st Century: A Commemorative Volume in Honour of Dr Tadeusz Szurski [Międzynarodowy i krajowy arbitraż handlowy u progu XXI wieku. Księga pamiątkowa dedykowana doktorowi habilitowanemu Tadeuszowi Szurskiemu], Warszawa 2008, p. 27-40

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30919

Irmiński Mateusz

The Scope in which Courts of Arbitration Are Bound by the EU Law in the Light of the Bases for Setting Aside an Arbitral Award or Refusal to Recognize or Declare its Enforceability [Original title: Zakres związania sądów arbitrażowych prawem Unii Europejskiej w świetle podstaw do uchylenia wyroku sądu arbitrażowego bądź odmowy uznania lub stwierdzenia jego wykonalności]

Biul.Arb. - Młody Arbitraż 2015, No. 22, p. 167-182

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 31334

Jakubowski Jerzy

Permanent Courts of Arbitration in Poland [Original title: Stałe sądy arbitrażowe w Polsce]

Warszawa 1961, ss. 39

Key issues: New York Convention, general works, arbitrator, arbitration procedure, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 30127

Jasiak Mikołaj

Arbitration Law Reform in Spain [Original title: Reforma prawa arbitrażowego w Hiszpanii]

Arbitration e-Review 2010, No. 3, p. 51-52

Key issues: general works, state court assistance, arbitrator, arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30951

Jóźwiak Marcin

An Arbitration Award is Just the Beginning

American Investor Zima 2016, Vol. XXVI, No. 1, p. 40

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31513

Kačevska Inga

Renaissance of the European Convention on International Commercial Arbitration

[in:] B. Gessel-Kalinowska vel Kalisz (ed.), The Challenges and the Future of Commercial and Investment Arbitration. Liber Amicorum Professor Jerzy Rajski, Warsaw 2015, p. 365-378

Key issues: general works, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31421

Kaczmarek Jacek

Cooperation and Control. Relations between the Arbitration Court and the Common Court at Various Stages of Proceedings [Original title: Współdziałanie i kontrola. Relacje pomiędzy sądem polubownym a sądem powszechnym na różnych etapach postępowania]

[in:] Dorota Czura-Kalinowska (ed.), Mediation and Arbitration as a Means of Amicable Dispute Resolution [Mediacja i arbitraż jako sposoby polubownego rozstrzygania sporów], Poznań 2009, p. 197-203

Key issues: state court assistance, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30718

Kała Dariusz P.

Bringing a Petition for the Reversal of an Award of a Court of Arbitration (legitymacy, the fee, the formal requirements, term) [Original title: Wniesienie skargi o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego (legitymacja, opłata, warunki formalne, termin)]

PUG 2012, No. 3, p. 30-35

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31070

Kała Dariusz P.

Chosen Issues Related to the Arbitration Court Award [Original title: Wybrane zagadnienia związane z wyrokiem sądu polubownego]

Rejent 2012, No. 4, p. 65-75

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31056

Kała Dariusz P.

Petition to Set Aside an Arbitration Award [Original title: Skarga o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego]

Jurysta 2012, No. 1, p. 38-45

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31054

Kała Dariusz P.

Petition to Set Aside an Arbitration Award (part 1) [Original title: Skarga o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego (cz. I)]

R.Pr. 2010, No. 2, p. 58-64

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30792

Kała Dariusz P.

Petition to Set Aside Arbitration Award (Part II) [Original title: Skarga o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego (cz. II)]

R. Pr. 2010, No. 3, p. 58-66

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30839

Kała Dariusz P.

Recognition and Enforcement of an Arbitration Award or Settlement Entered Into Before an Arbitration Court (Selected Issues) [Original title: Uznanie i stwierdzenie wykonalności wyroku sądu polubownego lub ugody przed nim zawartej (zagadnienia wybrane)]

Pal. 2013, No. 5-6, p. 79-84

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 31158

Kobler E.

Remarks on the Object of the Application for Setting Aside of an Arbitral Award in the Civil Procedure Code [Original title: Uwagi o przedmiocie skargi o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego w k.p.c.]

Głos Prawa 1937, No. 5-6, p. 287-289

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30077

Kocon Agnieszka

Poland

[in:] Ned Beale, Barbara Lautenschlager, Giuseppe Scotti, Leo Van den hole (eds.), Dispute Resolution Clauses in International Contracts. A Global Guide, Zurich-Basel-Geneva 2013, p. 433-458

Key issues: New York Convention, state court assistance, arbitrability of dispute, arbitration agreement, jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 31292

Koenner Marek

Selected Procedural Issues in Arbitral Proceedings on the Background of the Provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure [Original title: Wybrane zagadnienia proceduralne w postępowaniu przed sądem polubownym na tle przepisów kodeksu postępowania cywilnego]

Gdańskie Studia Prawnicze 2011, Vol. XXVI, p. 343-357

Key issues: arbitration procedure, jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31118

Kornhauser Michał

Is it Possible to Demand Withholding of the Challenged Award in the Proceedings from the Petition to Set Aside of an Arbitration Award? [Original title: Czy w postępowaniu ze skargi o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego można żądać wstrzymania wykonania zaskarżonego wyroku?]

NPC 1933, No. 15, p. 478-480

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30081

Kosteczka Zofia

Waiver of the right to challenge the award [Original title: Zrzeczenie się prawa do wniesienia skargi o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego]

Biul. Arb., 2013, No. 19, p. 92-104

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31131

Kozłowski Łukasz

Declaration of Insolvency of the Party to the Arbitration Proceedings [Original title: Ogłoszenie upadłości strony postępowania przed sądem polubownym]

MoP 2015, No. 8, p. 436-440

Key issues: arbitration agreement, arbitration procedure, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31370

Krawczyk Anna

The Issues of the Petition to Set Aside Arbitration Award under International and Polish Law [Original title: Problematyka skargi o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego w świetle prawa międzynarodowego i prawa krajowego]

[in:] Jan Olszewski (ed.), Arbitration and Mediation as Enterprise Supporting Instruments (Rzeszów 22-23.IX.2006) [Arbitraż i mediacja jako instrumenty wspierania przedsiębiorczości (Rzeszów 22-23.IX.2006)], Ius et Administratio 2006, Special Issue, p. 107-114

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30487

Kroński Aleksander

Arbitration in the Light of the Hitherto Case Law and Civil Procedure Code [Original title: Sądy polubowne w świetle dotychczasowego orzecznictwa i kodeksu postępowania cywilnego.]

Pal. 1931, No. 4-5, p. 169-179, [part II]

Key issues: arbitration procedure, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30083

Zawicki Kamil, Kubas Andrzej, Selwa Magdalena

Current Case Law - Poland

[in:] Alexander J. Bělohlávek, Filip Černý, Naděžda Rozehnalová (eds.), Czech (& Central European) Yearbook of Arbitration 2013, Vol. III, New York 2013, P. 211-237

Key issues: New York Convention, arbitrability of dispute, arbitration agreement, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 31308

Kuratowski Roman

Some Remarks on the Relation of State Courts to Arbitration Courts under the Civil Procedure Code [Original title: Kilka uwag o stosunku sądów państwowych do sądów polubownych według K.P.C.]

Głos Sądownictwa 1933, No. 4, p. 208-213

Key issues: state court assistance, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award

id: 30085

Łaszczuk Maciej

Hearing of Evidence Defectiveness as the Reason for Setting Aside an Arbitration Award [Original title: Wadliwość postępowania dowodowego jako przyczyna uchylenia wyroku arbitrażowego]

[in:] Jelonek-Jarco Barbara, Kos Rafał, Zawadzka Julita (eds), Usus magister est optimus. Legal Papers Dedicated to Professor Andrzej Kubas [Original title: Usus magister est optimus. Rozprawy prawnicze ofiarowane Profesorowi Andrzejowi Kubasowi], Warszawa 2016, p. 705-713

Key issues: arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31545

Łaszczuk Maciej, Szpara Justyna

Post-Arbitration Proceedings [Original title: Postępowanie postarbitrażowe]

[in:] Andrzej Szumański (ed.), The System of Commercial Law. Commercial Arbitration. Volume 8, Chapter 12 [System Prawa Handlowego. Arbitraż handlowy. Tom 8, Rozdział 12], Warszawa 2009, p. 559-717

Key issues: New York Convention, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 30757

Maciąg Andrzej

Fee Due for Petition for Setting Aside of an Arbitration Award [Original title: Opłata należna od skargi o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego]

[in:] Jan Olszewski (ed.), Arbitration and Mediation. Current Theoretical and Practical Problems of Functioning of Arbitration Courts and Mediation Institutions. Conference Materials (Nałęczów Zdrój 8 - 10.05.2009) [Arbitraż i mediacja. Aktualne problemy teorii i praktyki funkcjonowania sądów polubownych i ośrodków mediacyjnych. Materiały konferencyjne (Nałęczów Zdrój 8 - 10.05.2009 r.)], Rzeszów 2009, p. 241-247

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30671

Merezhko Oleksandr

International Commercial Arbitration from the Perspective of the Psychological Theory of Law [Original title: Międzynarodowy arbitraż handlowy z perspektywy psychologicznej teorii prawa]

Arbitration e-Review 2013, Special Edition, p. 6-11

Key issues: investment arbitration, arbitrator, arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 31159

Mędrzecka Joanna

Subjecting Disputes for Resolution to an Ad Hoc Arbitration Court and Common Court’s Control over the Arbitration Award [Original title: Poddawanie sporów pod rozstrzygnięcia sądu arbitrażowego ad hoc oraz kontrola sądu powszechnego nad orzeczeniem sądu polubownego]

Pieniądze i Więź 2003, No. 4, p. 175-182

Key issues: arbitrability of dispute, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30275

Monkiewicz Arkadiusz

The Topic of the Application for Setting Aside of an Arbitration Award [Original title: Problematyka skargi o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego]

R.Pr. 2001, No. 6, p. 53-64

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30280

Morek Rafał

Case Law Section [Original title: Przegląd orzecznictwa Sądu Najwyższego i sądów apelacyjnych]

Biul. Arb. 2008, No. 8, p. 122-124

Key issues: arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30818

Morek Rafał

Selected Court Decisions related to Arbitral Proceedings [Original title: Przegląd orzecznictwa Sądu Najwyższego i sądów apelacyjnych]

Biul. Arb., 2013, No. 19, p. 120-124

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31133

Morek Rafał

Selected Court Decisions Related to Arbitral Proceedings [Original title: Przegląd orzecznictwa Sądu Najwyższego i sądów apelacyjnych]

Biul. Arb. 2009, No. 9, p. 133-136

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30815

Neumann Marek

Public Policy and the Content of an Arbitral Award - commentary on the Supreme Court's ruling of 9 September 2010 (I CSK 535/09) [Original title: Klauzula porządku publicznego a treść wyroku sądu polubownego - glosa do wyroku Sądu Najwyższego z 9.09.2010 r. (I CSK 535/09)]

Glosa 2011, No. 2, p. 61-67

Key issues: arbitrator, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30994

Neumann Marek

Swiss Federal Tribunal Set Aside an Arbitral Award on Public Policy Grounds [Original title: Orzeczenie Szwajcarskiego Trybunału Federalnego ws. Atlético v. Benfica: Uchylenie orzeczenia arbitrażowego na podstawie klauzuli porządku publicznego]

Arbitration e-Review 2010, No. 3, p. 49-50

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30950

Olaś Andrzej

Between the Autonomy of Arbitration and the Protection of the Parties’ Rights and the Public Interest. Remarks on the Basis of the Act of 10 September 2015 Amending Some Statues in Connection with Supporting Amicable Dispute Resolution Methods [Original title: Pomiędzy autonomią arbitrażu a ochroną praw stron i interesu publicznego. Skarga o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego po zmianach wprowadzonych na mocy ustawy z dnia 10 września 2015 r. o zmianie niektórych ustaw w związku ze wspieraniem polubownych metod rozwiązywania sporów]

Palestra 2016, No. 11, p. 46-55

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 31808

Olaś Andrzej

Commentary to the Judgements of the Supreme Court Dated 13 April 2012 (I CSK 416/11) and 26 November 2008 (III CSK 163/08)[Original title: Glosa do wyroków Sądu Najwyższego z dnia 13 kwietnia 2012 r. (I CSK 416/11) oraz z dnia 26 listopada 2008 r. (III CSK 163/08)]

Stud. Prawn.-Ekonom. 2013, No. 88, p. 209-226

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award

id: 31262

Olaś Andrzej

Is the Admissibility of Cassation Appeal against the Judgment Rendered as a Result of the Petition to Set Aside the Arbitration Award Subject to Restrictions of Art. 3982 of Code of Civil Procedure – Remarks in the Light of the Act Amending Certain Acts in Relation to the Promotion of Alternative Dispute Resolution Methods of 10 September 2015 [Original title: Czy dopuszczalność skargi kasacyjnej od wyroku w sprawie ze skargi o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego podlega ograniczeniom z art. 3982 k.p.c. – uwagi na tle ustawy z 10.09.2015 r. o zmianie niektórych ustaw w związku ze wspieraniem polubownych metod rozwiązywania sporów]

PPC 2016, No. 2, p. 330-341

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31575

Olkowski Piotr, Strojnowski Mikołaj, Wiater Krzysztof

The Scope of Arbitrator’s Freedom by Determination and Application of the Applicable Substantial Law [Original title: Zakres swobody arbitra przy ustalaniu i stosowaniu właściwego prawa materialnego]

[in:] Józef Okolski (chair), Andrzej Całus, Maksymilian Pazdan, Stanisław Sołtysiński, Tomasz Wardyński, Stanisław Włodyka (ed.) Essays in Honour of 60 years of the Court of Arbitration at the Polish Chamber of Commerce in Warsaw [Księga pamiątkowa 60-lecia Sądu Arbitrażowego przy Krajowej Izbie Gospodarczej w Warszawie], Warszawa 2010, p. 385-407

Key issues: arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30927

Opaliński Łukasz

Arbitration in Domestic Trade [Original title: Arbitraż w krajowym obrocie gospodarczym]

[in:] Prace laureatów konkursu im. Prof. Jerzego Jakubowskiego, edycja druga [Works of the Winners of Prof. Jerzy Jakubowski Contest, Second Edition], Warszawa 2005, p. 195-244

Key issues: general works, state court assistance, arbitrability of dispute, arbitrator, arbitration agreement, arbitration procedure, jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal, settlement before arbitral tribunal, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award

id: 30960

Orecki Marcin

Does the Winner Take It All? - Principles Governing the Adjudication of Attorney's Fees in International Arbitration [Original title: Does the winner take it all? - zasady zasądzania kosztów zastępstwa procesowego w międzynarodowym arbitrażu]

Prz. Prawn. UW 2012, No. 1-2, p. 95-107

Key issues: arbitration procedure, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31123

Orecki Marcin

Petition to Set Aside Arbitral Award. A Commentary to the Ruling of the Appellate Court in Warsaw of 28 September 2016 (I ACa 843/16) [Original title: Skarga o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego. Glosa do postanowienia Sądu Apelacyjnego w Warszawie z 28.09.2016 r. (I ACa 843/16)]

PS 2017, No. 2, p. 130-140

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31830

Orecki Marcin

Polish Provisions on Courts of Arbitration - de Lege Ferenda Remarks [Original title: Polskie przepisy o sądzie polubownym (arbitrażowym) - uwagi de lege ferenda]

PPC 2014, No. 2, p. 198-237

Key issues: general works, arbitrability of dispute, arbitrator, arbitration agreement, arbitration procedure, jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31272

Orkusz Maciej

ʺSurprise” of Parties at Legal Grounds Applied in the Arbitral Award as an Infringement of Party’s Right to Present its Case

Arbitration Bulletin - Young Arbitration 2016, No. 24, p. 88-104

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31560

Orkusz Maciej

“Surprising” the Parties with the Legal Basis of the Arbitral Tribunal’s Adjudication and Deprivation of the Right of Defence [Original title: "Zaskoczenie" stron wyborem podstawy prawnej orzekania przez sąd polubowny a pozbawienie prawa do obrony]

Biul.Arb. - Młody Arbitraż 2015, No. 22, p. 126-138

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31331

Orzeł Aleksandra

A Few Remarks on Enforceability of Unilateral Dispute Resolution Clauses Involving Arbitration

[in:] K. Drličková, T. Kyselovská (red.) Resolution of International Disputes. Public Law in the Context of Immigration Crisis, COFOLA INTERNATIONAL 2016, Conference proceedings, Acta Universitatis Brunensis, Vol. 562, Brno 2016, p. 116-133

Key issues: arbitration agreement, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 31797

Orzeł Aleksandra

Commentary on the Supreme Court Judgement of 13.02.2014, V CSK 45/13 [Original title: Glosa do wyroku SN z dnia 13 lutego 2014 r., V CSK 45/13]

OSP 2015, No. 6, p. 858-865

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31371

Osiński Marcin

Proceedings Before Polish Arbitration Courts – Selected Issues [Original title: Postępowanie przed polskimi sądami polubownymi - wybrane zagadnienia]

[in:] Prace laureatów konkursu im. Prof. Jerzego Jakubowskiego, edycja druga [Works of the Winners of Prof. Jerzy Jakubowski Contest, Second Edition], Warszawa 2005, p.121-193

Key issues: general works, state court assistance, arbitrator, arbitration agreement, arbitration procedure, jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal, settlement before arbitral tribunal, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award

id: 30961

Pacocha Monika

The Model of a Petition for Setting Aside an Arbitration Award – de lege ferenda comments [Original title: Model postępowania ze skargi o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego – uwagi de lege ferenda]

PPH 2014, No. 12, p. 20-24

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31311

Pagacz Gabriela

Contents of the Polish Public Policy

Biul. Arb. 2012, No. 17, p. 89-96, [Article in English]

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 31048

Potrzobowski Karol

Commentary on the Supreme Court Ruling of 5.9.1967, I CZ 20/67 (re Court Control over Arbitral Awards) [Original title: Glosa do Postanowienia SN z 5.9.1967, I CZ 20/67 (dot. kontroli sądu nad wyrokami sądów polubownych)]

OSPiKA 1968, item 90 c, p. 210-212

Key issues: state court assistance, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30619

Prusak Małgorzata

Petition to Set Aside an Arbitration Award [Original title: Skarga o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego]

PPE 2009, No. 1-3, p. 87-119

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30311

Rablin Elżbieta

Basis for Petition to Set Aside an Arbitration Award on the Basis of the Warsaw Appellate Court Case Law [Original title: Podstawy skargi o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego na podstawie orzecznictwa Sądu Apelacyjnego w Warszawie]

MoP 2009, No. 1, special issue, p. 33-36

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30312

Rajski Jerzy

The Limits of Arbitral Tribunal's Autonomy in Respect of Application of Provisions of Law in Commercial Cases [Original title: Granice autonomii sądu arbitrażowego w odniesieniu do stosowania przepisów prawa w sprawach ze stosunków gospodarczych]

PPH 2011, No. 1, p. 6-9

Key issues: arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 30967

Rajski Jerzy

The Limits of the Arbitral Tribunal's Freedom in Respect of Applying Provisions of Law in Commercial Cases [Original title: Granice swobody sądu arbitrażowego w zakresie stosowania przepisów prawa w sprawach gospodarczych]

Arbitration e-Review 2011, No. 1, p. 5-10

Key issues: arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 30969

Schramm Piotr, Robenek Marcin

Gloss to the judgment of the Court of Appeals in Warsaw issued on June 14, 2012 in case no. I ACa 1241/11

e-Przegląd Arbitrażowy 2012, No. 3-4 (10-11), p. 15-22

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31146

Rozenblüth Ignacy

Is a State Court Ruling Regulating the Petition to Set Aside an Arbitration Award with Regards to the Merits of the Case Issued in the Form of a Judgement or a Decision? [Original title: Czy orzeczenie sądu państwowego, załatwiające merytorycznie skargę o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego, zapada pod postacią wyroku, czy też postanowienia?]

PPC 1937, No. 1-2, p.54-55

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30094

Ryszkowski Karol

Public Policy Clause as a General Clause in Commercial Arbitration in the Polish Law [Original title: Klauzula porządku publicznego jako klauzula generalna w arbitrażu handlowym w prawie polskim]

PPH 2014, No. 3, p. 17-20

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 31239

Selivon Mykola

Price/Quality/Promptness Ratio in the Dispute Resolution by the International Commercial Arbitration Court at the Ukrainian Chamber of Commerce and Industry [Original title: Wskaźnik cena-jakość-czas w rozstrzyganiu sporów przez Międzynarodowy Handlowy Sąd Arbitrażowy przy Ukraińskiej Izbie Handlowo-Przemysłowej]

Arbitration e-Review 2013, Special Edition, p. 23-26

Key issues: arbitrator, arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award

id: 31162

Siedlecki Władysław

Relation Between the Civil Court Proceedings and the Arbitration Proceedings [Original title: Stosunek sądowego postępowania cywilnego do postępowania arbitrażowego]

[in:] Władysław Siedlecki, Outline of Civil Procedure [Zarys postępowania cywilnego], Warszawa 1966, p. 38-44

Key issues: state court assistance, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30433

Sippel Harald

Austrian Supreme Court: Refusal to Conduct a Hearing Despite a Party's Motion is Reason to Set Aside an Arbitral Award [Odmowa przeprowadzenia rozprawy jako przesłanka uchylenia wyroku arbitrażowego]

Arbitration e-Review 2011, No. 1, p. 39-40

Key issues: arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30972

Siwik Robert

Arbitration Clause in Consumer Agreements – Conclusions Drawn from the Latest ETS Case Law [Original title: Zapis na sąd polubowny w umowach konsumenckich - wnioski z najnowszego orzecznictwa ETS]

PEP 2010, No. 3, p. 37-43

Key issues: arbitration agreement, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30794

Skoczylas Józef

Arbitration in the Amendment to the Civil Procedure Code of 28 July 2005 [Original title: Sądownictwo arbitrażowe w nowelizacji kodeksu postępowania cywilnego z 28 lipca 2005 r.]

[in:] Jan Olszewski (ed.), Arbitration and Mediation. Current Theoretical and Practical Problems of Functioning of Arbitral Tribunals and Mediation Institutions. Conference Materials (Nałęczów Zdrój 8 - 10.05.2009) [Arbitraż i mediacja. Aktualne problemy teorii i praktyki funkcjonowania sądów polubownych i ośrodków mediacyjnych. Materiały konferencyjne (Nałęczów Zdrój 8 - 10.05.2009 r.)], Rzeszów 2009, p. 349-362

Key issues: general works, state court assistance, arbitrability of dispute, arbitrator, arbitration agreement, arbitration procedure, jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal, settlement before arbitral tribunal, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30675

Skowrońska Katarzyna

Vacatur and Review of an Arbitral Award in Spain [Original title: Unieważnienie i rewizja wyroku sądu polubownego w Hiszpanii]

Arbitration e-Review 2014, No. 1-2, p. 61-70

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31283

Sokołowska Lidia

Arbitrability and Its Relevance as a Ground for Setting Aside an Arbitral Award - Comparative Law Comments in Light of the Amended Belgian Arbitration Law [Original title: Zdatność arbitrażowa sporu i jej znaczenie jako przesłanki skargi o uchylenie wyroku arbitrażowego - uwagi prawnoporównawcze w świetle nowelizacji belgijskiego prawa arbitrażowego]

Arbitration e-Review 2014, No. 1-2, p. 79-86

Key issues: arbitrability of dispute, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31284

Sołtys Bogusław

The Costs of Arbitration - Selected Issues in the Context of Disputes Concerning FIDIC Contracts [Original title: Koszty postępowania arbitrażowego - wybrane zagadnienia na tle sporów dotyczących kontraktów FIDIC]

ADR. Arbitraż i Mediacja 2014, No. 3, p. 37-45

Key issues: arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31315

Sołtysiński Stanisław

Investment Arbitration, Cohabitation with the System of Justice, Increasing Costs and Other Problems of Arbitration [Original title: Arbitraż inwestycyjny, kohabitacja z wymiarem sprawiedliwości, rosnące koszty i inne problemy sądownictwa polubownego]

[in:] J. Gudowski, K. Weitz (ed.), Aurea praxis, aurea theoria. Księga pamiątkowa ku czci Profesora Tadeusza Erecińskiego, tom II [Aurea praxis, aurea theoria. A Commemorative Volume in Honour of Professor Tadeusz Ereciński, Vol. II], Warszawa 2011, p. 1839-1870

Key issues: general works, state court assistance, investment arbitration, arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 31026

Stefanowicz Krzysztof

Arbitration Landscape in Poland - a Subjective View

[in:] Beata Gessel-Kalinowska vel Kalisz (ed.), Arbitration in Poland, Warszawa 2011, p. 9-18, [also Polish version]

Key issues: general works, state court assistance, arbitrability of dispute, investment arbitration, arbitrator, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30997

Strumiłło Tomasz

Legal Effects of an Arbitral Award [Original title: Skutki prawne wyroku arbitrażowego]

Biul. Arb. 2010, No. 3, p. 96-115

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 30883

Szczęśniak Alicja

A Few Remarks on Remission Proceedings in Cases under Petition to Set Aside Arbitration Award [Original title: Kilka uwag o postępowaniu remisyjnym w sprawach ze skargi o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego]

Arbitration e-Review 2013, No. 3-4, p. 60-66

Key issues: state court assistance, arbitration procedure, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31251

Szczęśniak Alicja

Commentary to the Judgement of the Supreme Court - the Civil Chamber Dated 13 April 2012, I CSK 416/11[Original title: Glosa do wyroku Sądu Najwyższego - Izba Cywilna z dnia 13 kwietnia 2012 r., I CSK 416/11]

OSP 2014, No. 1, p. 11-19

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award

id: 31267

Szpara Justyna

Setting Aside an Arbitration Award

[in:] Arbitration in Poland, Warszawa 2011, s. 111-124

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31041

Szumański Andrzej

Implied Conclusion of the Arbitration Agreement [Original title: Konkludentne przystąpienie do zapisu na sąd polubowny]

PPPM 2012, Vol. 11, p. 29-51

Key issues: arbitration agreement, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award

id: 31199

Tomaszewski Maciej

Challenge of an Arbitrator and the Mode of Consideration Thereof [Original title: Wniosek o wyłączenie arbitra i tryb rozpoznania wniosku]

PS 2012, No. 2, p. 25-45

Key issues: arbitrator, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31045

Tomaszewski Maciej

Legal Effects of an Arbitration Award [Original title: Skutki prawne wyroku sądu polubownego]

[in:] J. Gudowski, K. Weitz (ed.), Aurea praxis, aurea theoria. Księga pamiątkowa ku czci Profesora Tadeusza Erecińskiego, tom II [Aurea praxis, aurea theoria. A Commemorative Volume in Honour of Professor Tadeusz Ereciński, Vol. II], Warszawa 2011, p. 1899-1932

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award

id: 31028

Tomaszewski Maciej

On Challenging Corporate Resolutions in the Arbitration Court – de lege ferenda [Original title: O zaskarżaniu uchwał korporacyjnych do sądu polubownego - de lege ferenda]

PS 2012, No. 4, p. 22-39

Key issues: arbitrability of dispute, arbitration agreement, arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31055

Weitz Karol

Setting Aside of an Arbitration Award Due to a Final Court Judgement (Article 1206 § 1 (6) of the Civil Procedure Code) [Original title: Uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego z powodu prawomocnego wyroku sądu (art. 1206 § 1 pkt 6 k.p.c.)]

[in:] Józef Okolski (chair), Andrzej Całus, Maksymilian Pazdan, Stanisław Sołtysiński, Tomasz Wardyński, Stanisław Włodyka (ed.) Essays in Honour of 60 years of the Court of Arbitration at the Polish Chamber of Commerce in Warsaw [Księga pamiątkowa 60-lecia Sądu Arbitrażowego przy Krajowej Izbie Gospodarczej w Warszawie], Warszawa 2010, p. 691-705

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30942

Weitz Karol

The Proceedings Resulted from the the Petition to Set Aside an Arbitration Award and the Regulations on the Separate Proceedings [Original title: Postępowanie ze skargi o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego a przepisy o postępowaniach odrębnych]

Pal. 2008, No. 5-6, p. 254-259

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30721

Wętrys Ewelina

Application of the Principle of Res Judicata to Domestic Arbitral Awards under Polish Law

Arbitration Bulletin - Young Arbitration 2016, No. 24, p. 105-121

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award

id: 31561

Wętrys Ewelina

Application of the Rei Iudicata Principle to National Arbitral Awards under Polish Law [Original title: Zastosowanie zasady rei iudicatea do krajowych wyroków arbitrażowych według polskiego prawa]

Biul.Arb. - Młody Arbitraż 2015, No. 22, p. 139-153

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award

id: 31332

Więzowska-Czepiel Beata

New Arbitration Regulations in Disputes Resulting from Contracts Concluded with a Consumer [Original title: Nowe uregulowania sądownictwa polubownego w sporach wynikających z umów, których stroną jest konsument]

PPH 2017, No. 3, p. 43-49

Key issues: arbitrator, arbitration agreement, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31827

Wiśniewski Andrzej W.

International Commercial Arbitration in Poland. The Legal Status of Arbitration and Arbitrators [Original title: Międzynarodowy arbitraż handlowy w Polsce. Status prawny arbitrażu i arbitrów]

Warszawa 2011, pp. 612

Key issues: New York Convention, general works, state court assistance, arbitrability of dispute, arbitrator, arbitration agreement, arbitration procedure, jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal, settlement before arbitral tribunal, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 31015

Witkowska Anna

Composition of the Arbitral Tribunal After the Award is Set Aside [Original title: Skład zespołu orzekającego po uchyleniu wyroku sądu polubownego]

e-Przegląd Arbitrażowy 2015, No. 3-4, p. 26-33

Key issues: arbitrator, arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31802

Wojas Jakub

The Institution of Arbitration in the Country of Cherry Blossoms [Original title: Instytucja arbitrażu w Kraju Kwitnącej Wiśni]

[in:] A. Garnuszek, L. Mazur, A. Orzeł (eds.), Quo Vadis, Arbitrażu? Quo Vadis, Arbitration?, Warszawa 2013, p. 624-644

Key issues: general works, state court assistance, arbitrator, arbitration agreement, arbitration procedure, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31234

Wolak-Danecka Anna

Arbitration in the Czech Republic [Original title: Arbitraż w Republice Czeskiej]

Biul. Arb. 2010-2011, No. 4, p. 71-81

Key issues: general works, arbitrability of dispute, arbitrator, arbitration agreement, arbitration procedure, jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30989

Wydra Łukasz

Commentary to the Order of the Supreme Court Dated 16 October 2014 (docket no. III CZ 39/14) [Original title: Glosa do postanowienia Sądu Najwyższego z 16.10.2014 r. (sygn. akt: III CZ 39/14)]

ADR 2016, No. 2, p. 71-83

Key issues: arbitrator, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31785

Zachariasiewicz Maciej

Corruption in International Arbitration: Arbitrability of the Dispute and the Governing Law [Original title: Korupcja w arbitrażu międzynarodowym: zdatność arbitrażowa sporu i prawo właściwe]

[in:] Poczobut Jerzy, Wiśniewski Andrzej W. (eds), Private Law and Arbitration. Commemorative Volume Dedicated to Dr. Maciej Tomaszewski [Original title: Prawo prywatne i arbitraż. Księga jubileuszowa dedykowana doktorowi Maciejowi Tomaszewskiemu], Warszawa 2016, p. 436-458

Key issues: arbitrability of dispute, arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31537

Zachariasiewicz Maciej

Post-Award Proceedings: Claim for Annulment of Arbitral Award and the Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards

[in:] Gessel-Kalinowska vel Kalisz Beata (ed.), Polish arbitration law, Wrocław 2014, p. 441-624

Key issues: New York Convention, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 31451

Zachariasiewicz Maciej

Post-Award Proceedings: Claim for Annulment of Arbitral Award and the Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards [Original title: Postępowania post-arbitrażowe: skarga o uchylenie orzeczenia sądu polubownego oraz uznawanie i wykonywanie orzeczeń arbitrażowych]

[in:] Gessel-Kalinowska vel Kalisz Beata (ed.), Diagnosis for Arbitration. Functioning of Arbitration Law and the Directions of Postulated Changes [Diagnoza arbitrażu. Funkcjonowanie prawa o arbitrażu i kierunki postulowanych zmian], Wrocław 2014, p. 402-593

Key issues: New York Convention, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 31458

Zachariasiewicz Maciej, Zrałek Jacek

On the Need to Amend the Provisions on Jurisdiction and Competence of Courts upon Reduction of Instance Supervision in Arbitration Cases [Original title: O potrzebie zmiany przepisów dotyczących jurysdykcji i właściwości sądów po zredukowaniu kontroli instancyjnej w sprawach arbitrażowych]

PS 2016, No 7-8, p. 132-158

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 31788

Zbiegień Tomasz

Petition to Set Aside an Arbitration Award [Original title: Skarga o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego]

[in:] Sylwester Pieckowski (chair), Piotr Nowaczyk, Jerzy Poczobut, Andrzej Szumański, Andrzej Tynel (ed.), Polish and International Commercial Arbitration at the Threshold of the 21st Century: A Commemorative Volume in Honour of Dr Tadeusz Szurski [Międzynarodowy i krajowy arbitraż handlowy u progu XXI wieku. Księga pamiątkowa dedykowana doktorowi habilitowanemu Tadeuszowi Szurskiemu], Warszawa 2008, p. 299-313

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30181

Zbiegień Tomasz

The Public Policy Clause in Setting Aside of an Arbitration Award [Original title: Klauzula porządku publicznego przy uchyleniu wyroku sądu polubownego]

[in:] M. Łaszczuk (chair), M. Furtek, S. Pieckowski, J. Poczobut, A. Szumański, M. Tomaszewski (eds.), Arbitration and Mediation. A Commemorative Volume Dedicated to Dr Andrzej Tynel [Arbitraż i mediacja. Księga jubileuszowa dedykowana doktorowi Andrzejowi Tynelowi], Warszawa 2012, p. 698-717

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31113

Zielony Andrzej

A Few Remarks on the Nature of the Petition To Set Aside an Arbitration Award (Taking into Account the Historical and Legal Comparative Aspects) [Original title: Kilka uwag o naturze skargi o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego (z uwzględnieniem aspektów historycznych i prawnoporównawczych)]

[in:] Józef Okolski (chair), Andrzej Całus, Maksymilian Pazdan, Stanisław Sołtysiński, Tomasz Wardyński, Stanisław Włodyka (ed.) Essays in Honour of 60 years of the Court of Arbitration at the Polish Chamber of Commerce in Warsaw [Księga pamiątkowa 60-lecia Sądu Arbitrażowego przy Krajowej Izbie Gospodarczej w Warszawie], Warszawa 2010, p. 706-732

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 30943

Zielony Andrzej

Introduction of an Arbitration Award to the Domestic Legal System on the Example of Selected Foreign Legal Systems [Original title: Wprowadzanie wyroku sądu polubownego do krajowego porządku prawnego na przykładzie wybranych obcych systemów prawnych]

[in:] J. Gudowski, K. Weitz (ed.), Aurea praxis, aurea theoria. Księga pamiątkowa ku czci Profesora Tadeusza Erecińskiego, tom II [Aurea praxis, aurea theoria. A Commemorative Volume in Honour of Professor Tadeusz Ereciński, Vol. II], Warszawa 2011, p. 2005-2080

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 31031

Zielony Andrzej

Model of a Petition to Set Aside an Arbitration Award (De Lege Lata and De Lege Ferenda Comments) [Original title: Model rozpoznania skargi o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego (uwagi de lege lata i de lege ferenda)]

[in:] Ereciński Tadeusz, Grzegorczyk Paweł, Weitz Karol (eds), Sine ira et studio. Księga jubileuszowa dedykowana Sędziemu Jackowi Gudowskiemu, Warsaw 2016, p. 784-804

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31815

Zych Maciej

Law applicable to the merits of dispute in international commercial arbitration under Art. 1194 of the (Polish) Code of Civil Procedure [Original title: Prawo właściwe dla meritum sporu w międzynarodowym arbitrażu handlowym na gruncie art. 1194 k.p.c.]

PPH 2016, No. 11, p. 37-46

Key issues: arbitration procedure, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31796

Zych Maciej

The Relation Between the Public Policy Clause and the Grounds for Setting Aside an Arbitration Award Considered upon a Party’s Motion [Original title: Stosunek klauzuli porządku publicznego do podstaw uchylenia wyroku arbitrażowego uwzględnianych na wniosek]

Glosa 2017, No. 1, p. 54-63

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 31826

Błaszczak Łukasz

Revision of an Arbitration Award with a Special Consideration of Public Policy Clause [Original title: Kontrola orzeczenia arbitrażowego ze szczególnym uwzględnieniem klauzuli porządku publicznego]

ADR. Arbitraż i Mediacja 2008, No. 3 (3)

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 50017

Błaszczak Łukasz, Marszałkowska-Krześ Elwira

Control of an Arbitration Award by a State Court [Original title: Kontrola wyroku sądu polubownego przez sąd powszechny]

ADR. Arbitraż i Mediacja 2011, No. 4 (16)

Key issues: New York Convention, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 50159

Mularczyk Krystian, Cioch Paweł

Report from the Scientific Seminar “Court Control of Arbitration Awards and Mediation Settlements” [Sprawozdanie z seminarium naukowego ,,Sądowa kontrola rozstrzygnięć arbitrażowych i ugód mediacyjnych”]

ADR. Arbitraż i Mediacja 2010, No. 4 (12)

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 50125

Gil Piotr

Arbitration Agreement in Public Procurement Agreements [Original title: Zapis na sąd polubowny w umowach o wykonanie zamówienia publicznego]

ADR. Arbitraż i Mediacja 2011, No. 4 (16)

Key issues: arbitration agreement, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 50166

Głodowski Włodzimierz

Petition to Set Aside an Arbitration Award as a Procedural Writ [Original title: Skarga o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego jako pismo procesowe]

ADR. Arbitraż i Mediacja 2008, No. 4 (4)

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 50032

Hauser-Morel Maria

Contractual Exclusion of the Right to File a Petition to Set Aside Arbitration Award - Comments Based on the Swiss Regulation [Original title: Umowne wyłączenie prawa do złożenia skargi o uchylenie wyroku arbitrażowego - uwagi na tle regulacji szwajcarskiej]

ADR. Arbitraż i Mediacja 2012, No. 1 (17)

Key issues: arbitration agreement, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 50173

Kamieniecka Dorota

Civil Mediators’ Association in Wieluń [Original title: Stowarzyszenie Mediatorów Cywilnych w Wieluniu]

ADR. Arbitraż i Mediacja 2013, No. 3 (23)

Key issues: general works, state court assistance, arbitrability of dispute, arbitrator, arbitration agreement, arbitration procedure, jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal, settlement before arbitral tribunal, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 50249

Kociubiński Jakub

Arbitration in European Competition Law - An Outline [Original title: Arbitraż w europejskim prawie konkurencji - zarys problemu]

ADR. Arbitraż i Mediacja 2012, No. 2 (18)

Key issues: arbitration procedure, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 50198

Markiewicz Krystian

Acceptance for Recognition of a Petition for Setting Aside of an Arbitration Award [Original title: Przyjęcie do rozpoznania skargi o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego]

ADR. Arbitraż i Mediacja 2008, No. 1 (1)

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 50003

Michalska Monika

Recourse against an Arbitration Award under the Italian Civil Procedure Code [Original title: Zaskarżenie wyroku sądu polubownego według włoskiego Kodeksu postępowania cywilnego]

ADR. Arbitraż i Mediacja 2008, No. 1 (1)

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 50004

Michalska-Marciniak Monika

Appeal in Proceedings Based on Petition to Set Aside Arbitration Award [Original title: Instancyjność postępowania ze skargi o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego]

ADR. Arbitraż i Mediacja 2012, No. 4 (20)

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 50217

Pokropek Aleksandra

Legal Issues of the Arbitration Clause in so-called Option Disputes [Original title: Problematyka prawna zapisu na sąd polubowny w tzw. sprawach opcyjnych]

ADR. Arbitraż i Mediacja 2012, No. 1 (17)

Key issues: arbitration agreement, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 50176

Sadowski Wojciech

Court Control over Arbitration Awards in Investment Disputes [Original title: Sądowa kontrola wyroków arbitrażowych w sporach inwestycyjnych]

ADR. Arbitraż i Mediacja 2009, No. 2 (6)

Key issues: investment arbitration, arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 50061

Szczęśniak Alicja

Domestic Jurisdiction of a State Court for Ruling in Proceedings Initiated by a Petition to Set Aside Arbitration Award [Original title: Jurysdykcja krajowa sądu państwowego do orzekania w postępowaniu wszczętym skargą o uchylenie wyroku sądu polubownego]

ADR. Arbitraż i Mediacja 2013, No. 3 (23)

Key issues: arbitration award, petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 50246

Wiśniewski Andrzej W.

Public Policy As a Ground for Setting Aside an Arbitration Award (Especially in Domestic Trade Relations) [Original title: Klauzula porządku publicznego jako podstawa uchylenia wyroku sądu arbitrażowego (ze szczególnym uwzględnieniem stosunków krajowego obrotu gospodarczego)]

ADR. Arbitraż i Mediacja 2009, No. 2 (6)

Key issues: petition to set aside arbitration award

id: 50070

Wiśniewski Andrzej W.

The Consequences of Respondent’s Failure to Timely Object to the Jurisdiction of the Arbitral Tribunal

ADR. Arbitraż i Mediacja 2013, No. 4 (24)

Key issues: jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal, petition to set aside arbitration award, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award

id: 50260

scroll up