Seat of arbitration: problematic issues of theory and practice

Abstract

The effectiveness of arbitration, as well as its attractiveness for disputing parties, depends more on the existing and developed legislative framework of the convention (ratification of numerous multilateral international legal instruments) and national arbitration legislation. It is the combination of these sources that guarantees the procedural autonomy of the arbitration, while significantly reducing the interference of national courts, In addition to the existence of mandatory and optional rules for the provision of such assistance in arbitration.
 Unfortunately, such a legal framework for the consideration of foreign economic disputes by international commercial arbitration may be too complex and even sometimes unclear and problematic. However, this ambiguity in the interpretation and understanding of the law of international commercial arbitration can be addressed by paying sufficient attention to the definitional apparatus, the assessment of the development and improvement of international and national regulationslegal acts that gradually depart from archaic approaches to the definition of regulatory law through more effective analysis.
 Thus, in this article special attention is paid to theoretical and applied problematic issues of determination of «seat of arbitration». Due to clear inconsistencies and uncertainty in the national legislation and enforcement activities of many countries regarding the place of arbitration, this leads to numerous «procedural traps» in considering applications for recognition and enforcement of the award of international commercial arbitration.
 The author pays special attention to the analysis of the legislative regulation of the place of arbitration in Ukraine. And, from the perspective of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights and the Supreme Court, conclusions are drawn regarding the corresponding contradictions in the definitional apparatus.