Arbitration is based on consent. Arbitration is supposed to be an effective mechanism of dispute resolution. What happens if the two features collide, as it seems to occur when arbitrators believe the best course of action lies in an order to perform, or abstain from, a certain action, instead of the typical pecuniary award? This article explores the issue of non-pecuniary awards and orders, reaching the conclusion that arbitrators can rely on the power to make non-pecuniary orders, which may stem from a variety of sources, including the parties' (express or implied) will, the lex arbitri, the law applicable to the substance, or the arbitrators' implied powers. In general, this poses no problems at the enforcement stage, although it raises interesting issues that need attention.
Los árbitros y el poder para dictar condenas no pecuniarias
RAMOS MUNOZ, DAVID
2008
Abstract
Arbitration is based on consent. Arbitration is supposed to be an effective mechanism of dispute resolution. What happens if the two features collide, as it seems to occur when arbitrators believe the best course of action lies in an order to perform, or abstain from, a certain action, instead of the typical pecuniary award? This article explores the issue of non-pecuniary awards and orders, reaching the conclusion that arbitrators can rely on the power to make non-pecuniary orders, which may stem from a variety of sources, including the parties' (express or implied) will, the lex arbitri, the law applicable to the substance, or the arbitrators' implied powers. In general, this poses no problems at the enforcement stage, although it raises interesting issues that need attention.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
