Arbitration aspects of report presented to European Parliament committee workshop on Brussels Regulation reform | Practical Law

Arbitration aspects of report presented to European Parliament committee workshop on Brussels Regulation reform | Practical Law

Publication of a report presented to a workshop of the European Parliament's Committee on Legal Affairs on the review of the Brussels Regulation on 4 October 2011, which calls for amendments to various proposals, including the arbitration exception.

Arbitration aspects of report presented to European Parliament committee workshop on Brussels Regulation reform

by PLC Arbitration
Published on 05 Oct 2011 • England, Wales
Publication of a report presented to a workshop of the European Parliament's Committee on Legal Affairs on the review of the Brussels Regulation on 4 October 2011, which calls for amendments to various proposals, including the arbitration exception.
Following publication by the European Commission in December 2010 of its draft legislative proposal to reform the Brussels Regulation, Professor Andrew Dickinson has produced a report, The Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on Jurisdiction and the Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (Recast) ("Brussels I bis" Regulation). The report, which considers several aspects of the proposed reforms, including the arbitration exception, was presented at a European Parliament workshop on 4 October 2011.
Professor Dickinson commends the objective of supporting the effectiveness of arbitration agreements and giving priority to the courts of the agreed or designated seat of arbitration. However, he considers that "significant drafting changes" are needed to ensure that objective is met. His proposals include:
  • Specifying that member states are required to stay proceedings where the courts of the seat of arbitration or the arbitral tribunal are seised of proceedings to determine the existence, validity or effect of the arbitration agreement "with respect to the dispute between the parties".
  • Providing that, unless the parties agree otherwise in writing, where the court whose jurisdiction is contested declines jurisdiction on the basis of an arbitration agreement (under its national law), the judgment of that court shall not be binding on the courts of the seat of arbitration or on the tribunal.
  • Amending the recitals to the Brussels Regulation to make clear that it does not apply to issues relating to arbitration, whether they arise as the main object or as a preliminary issue in proceedings.
  • Clarifying that the courts of the seat can determine questions concerning the effectiveness of the arbitration agreement, even if they are second seised and if the proceedings before them fall within the material scope of the Regulation.
  • Penalising in costs parties who either:
    • commence proceedings in a member state without reasonable grounds for believing the court has jurisdiction; or
    • challenge the jurisdiction of a member state court without reasonable grounds for doing so.
(See section 3 and drafting proposals 8 and 9 of the report.)
For details of Professor Dickinson's findings in relation to other aspects of the reform, see Legal update, Brussels Regulation: report presented to European Parliament committee workshop on reform proposals.
The proposal to reform the Brussels Regulation is proceeding under the ordinary legislative procedure and is awaiting a first reading in the European Parliament. A draft report prepared by the rapporteur of the Committee on Legal Affairs in June 2011 is scheduled for adoption by the committee on 22 November 2011. The European Parliament will then vote on the committee's report in its plenary session on 12 December 2011 (see Legal update, European Parliament committee report on proposed amendment of Brussels Regulation).
To track the progress of the Brussels Regulation reform, see Practice note, Reform of the Brussels Regulation: tracker.
Source: Conflictoflaws.net.