{"id":152690,"date":"2026-11-04T10:38:38","date_gmt":"2026-11-04T10:38:38","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legal500.com\/guides\/?post_type=comparative_guide&#038;p=152690"},"modified":"2026-11-04T12:51:01","modified_gmt":"2026-11-04T12:51:01","slug":"georgia-international-arbitration","status":"publish","type":"comparative_guide","link":"https:\/\/www.legal500.com\/guides\/chapter\/georgia-international-arbitration\/","title":{"rendered":"Georgia: International Arbitration"},"content":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"template":"","class_list":["post-152690","comparative_guide","type-comparative_guide","status-publish","hentry","guides-international-arbitration","jurisdictions-georgia"],"acf":[],"appp":{"post_list":{"below_title":"<div class=\"guide-author-details\"><span class=\"guide-author\">J&#038;T Consulting LLC<\/span><span class=\"guide-author-logo\"><img src=\"https:\/\/www.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/1\/2025\/11\/j-t-consulting.jpeg\"\/><\/span><\/div>"},"post_detail":{"above_title":"<div class=\"guide-author-details\"><span class=\"guide-author\">J&#038;T Consulting LLC<\/span><span class=\"guide-author-logo\"><img src=\"https:\/\/www.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/1\/2025\/11\/j-t-consulting.jpeg\"\/><\/span><\/div>","below_title":"<span class=\"guide-intro\">This country specific Q&amp;A provides an overview of International Arbitration laws and regulations applicable in Georgia<\/span><div class=\"guide-content\"><div class=\"filter\">\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t<input type=\"text\" placeholder=\"Search questions and answers...\" class=\"filter-container__search-field\">\r\n\t\t\t<\/div>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t<ol class=\"custom-counter\">\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What legislation applies to arbitration in your country? Are there any mandatory laws?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Georgian legislation is remarkable for its modern and arbitration-friendly approach that makes Georgia an ideal forum and place for arbitration.<\/p>\n<p>The laws that apply to arbitration in Georgia are the following:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong><u>The Law of Georgia on Arbitration<\/u><\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>On June 19, 2009 the Parliament of Georgia adopted the Law on Arbitration, which entered into force on January 1, 2010. The Law of Georgia on Arbitration was developed on the basis of a Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration 1985 (taking into consideration the amendments made to it in 2006) adopted by the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) (hereinafter referred to as the \u201c<strong>UNCITRAL Model Law\u201d<\/strong>) and is in full compliance with international standards and best practice. The Law of Georgia on Arbitration governs the constitution of arbitral tribunals, the conduct of arbitration proceedings, the rendering of awards in Georgia, and the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards.<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a> This Law applies to both domestic and international arbitration proceedings.<\/p>\n<p>The Law of Georgia on Arbitration is based on the principle of party autonomy on the whole. The parties are free to agree on different rules and procedures than those provided in the law. However, the law contains several mandatory provisions as well. For example, Article 37 (2) of this law has made it mandatory that during the decision-making process an arbitrator does not have the right to abstain from voting.<\/p>\n<p>Arbitral awards are binding and may be recognised and enforced in accordance with Articles 44 and 45 of the Law, subject to the limited statutory grounds for refusing recognition or enforcement. Courts of Appeal are competent in respect of awards rendered in Georgia, while the Supreme Court of Georgia has jurisdiction over awards rendered outside Georgia.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong><u>The Civil Procedure Code of Georgia<\/u><\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>The participation of a court in arbitration proceedings and enforcement of an arbitral award is regulated by the Civil Procedure Code of Georgia, Chapter XLIV<sup>3<\/sup> &#8211; Chapter XLIV<sup>5<\/sup> of Section Seven<sup>1<\/sup>. A court shall intervene in arbitration proceedings only in cases directly provided by the Law of Georgia on Arbitration and according to the procedures provided for in the Civil Procedure Code of Georgia.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong><u>The New York Convention 1958<\/u><\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Georgia is also subject to the United Nations Convention of June 10, 1958 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (hereinafter referred to as the New York Convention), which was ratified by the resolution of the Parliament of Georgia of February 3, 1994. This means that arbitral awards rendered in Georgia can be recognized and enforced abroad, as well as arbitral awards rendered outside Georgia can be recognized and enforced in Georgia.<\/p>\n<p>When deciding upon the recognition and enforcement of the foreign arbitral awards, the Supreme Court of Georgia applies the rules of the New York Convention together with the domestic law. Under the New York Convention, foreign arbitration agreements are also subject to enforcement in the territory of Georgia.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong><u>The Law of Georgia on Private International Law<\/u><\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>The Law of Georgia on Private International Law establishes conflict-of-laws rules relevant to private-law relationships involving a foreign element.<a href=\"#_ftn2\" name=\"_ftnref2\">[2]<\/a> When the parties have not determined the applicable substantive law to their arbitration agreement and it is up to a court or an arbitral institution to decide, they might take into consideration the provisions of the above law. Therefore, provisions of this law may also apply to arbitration. However, there is no practice regarding this in Georgia and the application of the rules of Private International Law in Arbitration is highly controversial.<\/p>\n<p>However, regarding the international arbitral awards, the rules that regulate the recognition and enforcement of foreign court decisions provided for in the Law of Georgia on Private International Law are applied.<a href=\"#_ftn3\" name=\"_ftnref3\">[3]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>The Georgian Supreme Court, when dealing with recognition and enforcement issues, tends to apply the Law of Georgia on Private International Law and The Minsk Convention of 1993 (a treaty between the CIS-Countries), application of which is criticized in doctrine.<a href=\"#_ftn4\" name=\"_ftnref4\">[4]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> Law of Georgia on Arbitration, Article 1(1)<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref2\" name=\"_ftn2\">[2]<\/a> Law of Georgia on Private International Law, Article 1.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref3\" name=\"_ftn3\">[3]<\/a> <em>Tsertsvadze<\/em>, <em>Giorgi<\/em>, International Arbitration (Comparative Analysis), Publishing House \u201cMeridiani\u201d, Tbilisi 2012, p.701<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref4\" name=\"_ftn4\">[4]<\/a> <em>Tsertsvadze<\/em>, <em>Giorgi<\/em>, Interpretation and Application of the New York Convention in the Republic of Georgia, Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, George A. Bermann (Editor), Ius Comparatum \u2013 Global Studies in Comparative Law, Volume 23, p. 326<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Is your country a signatory to the New York Convention? Are there any reservations to the general obligations of the Convention?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Georgia is a signatory to the New York Convention, which was ratified by a resolution of the Parliament of Georgia of February 3, 1994. The convention entered into force for Georgia on 31 August 1994. There are no reservations to the general obligations of the Convention. Specifically, Georgia did not make the reciprocity or commercial reservations, so the Convention applies to awards from any Contracting State and for all commercial disputes. It is fully applicable in Georgia, making the New York Convention applicable <em>erga omnes, that is, to arbitral awards from any foreign state.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Georgian courts also enforce arbitral awards made in the territory of states not being members of the New York Convention. Such issues, namely the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards, are regulated by bilateral agreements between the countries. The enforcement of foreign arbitral awards, including those under the New York Convention, is governed domestically by the Law of Georgia on Arbitration (2009, as amended) and supplemented by the Civil Procedure Code, which sets out the procedural rules for recognition and enforcement.<\/p>\n<p>For the purposes of the New York Convention, regarding the validity of arbitration agreement, under the Law of Georgia on Arbitration, an arbitration agreement can be considered to be in writing if it is concluded by electronic notification, Georgian law recognizes arbitration agreements concluded through electronic communications, provided that the information remains accessible for future reference.<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a> Enforcement may only be refused under the grounds listed in Article V of the New York Convention, such as invalid arbitration agreement, lack of due process, non-arbitrability or violation of public policy.<a href=\"#_ftn2\" name=\"_ftnref2\">[2]<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> Law of Georgia on Arbitration, Article 8(5).<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref2\" name=\"_ftn2\">[2]<\/a> New York Convention, Article V<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What other arbitration-related treaties and conventions is your country a party to?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>In addition to the New York Convention, Georgia is a party to the following conventions:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States (The ICSID Convention 1965) (<em>entered into force for Georgia on September 6, 1992<\/em>). Georgia signed the ICSID Convention and deposited its instrument of ratification on 7 August 1992. The Convention entered into force for Georgia on 6 September 1992., allowing investor-state disputes to be submitted to ICSID arbitration.<\/li>\n<li>The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of 23 May 1969 (<em>entered into force for Georgia on 8 July 1995<\/em>)<\/li>\n<li>The Hague Convention on Abolishing the Requirement of Legalisation for Foreign Public Documents of 5 October 1961 (<em>entered into force for Georgia on 14 May 2007<\/em>)<\/li>\n<li>The Energy Charter Treaty 1994 (<em>entered into force for Georgia on April 16, 1998<\/em>)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong><u>Bilateral Investment Treaties<\/u><\/strong><a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\"><u>[1]<\/u><\/a><\/p>\n<p>Most of these BITs include arbitration clauses for investor-state disputes, typically providing for arbitration under ICSID rules or UNCITRAL arbitration rules. These treaties follow international investment standards and ensure that foreign investors can bring claims against Georgia in accordance with the treaty provisions.<\/p>\n<p>Georgia has bilateral agreements on investment promotion and mutual protection enforced with 31 countries, namely:\u00a0 the United States of America, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belgium-Luxemburg Economic Union, Bulgaria, China, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Iran, Israel, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, the Netherlands, Romania, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, the United Kingdom, and Uzbekistan.<\/p>\n<p>Among them are the following:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Trade and Investment Framework Agreement (TIFA) with the United States of America (<em>signed in 2007<\/em>).<\/li>\n<li>In 2012, The United States of America and Georgia established a High-Level Dialogue on Trade and Investment.<\/li>\n<li>Georgia has shared a Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) with the United States of America since 1997.<\/li>\n<li>Association Agreement (AA), together with a Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA) with the European Union (<em>signed on June 27, 2014<\/em>)<\/li>\n<li>Free trade agreement with the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) countries of Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, and Switzerland (<em>signed in 2016<\/em>)<\/li>\n<li>Free trade agreement with China (<em>entered into force in January 2018<\/em>)<\/li>\n<li>Free trade agreement with Hong Kong (<em>signed in 2018, which is awaiting its ratification by Parliament<\/em>)<\/li>\n<li>The \u201cAgreement between Japan and Georgia for the Liberalisation, Promotion and Protection of Investment\u201d (Japan-Georgia Investment Agreement) (<em>signed on 29 January, 2021<\/em>)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>The recognition and enforcement of awards under these treaties and agreements is governed domestically by the Law of Georgia on Arbitration, which incorporates international obligations, and supplemented by the Civil Procedure Code, which provides procedural rules for enforcement.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> Information on Georgia\u2019s international investment agreements are available at: &lt;<a href=\"https:\/\/investmentpolicy.unctad.org\/international-investment-agreements\/countries\/77\/georgia\">https:\/\/investmentpolicy.unctad.org\/international-investment-agreements\/countries\/77\/georgia<\/a>&gt;<\/p>\n<p>&lt;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.privacyshield.gov\/article?id=Georgia-Bilateral-Investment-and-Taxation-Treaties\">https:\/\/www.privacyshield.gov\/article?id=Georgia-Bilateral-Investment-and-Taxation-Treaties<\/a>&gt;<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Is the law governing international arbitration in your country based on the UNCITRAL Model Law? Are there significant differences between the two? Are there any impending plans to reform the arbitration laws in your country? Has your jurisdiction adopted, or is it considering adopting, the amendments of 6 July 2026 regarding electronic awards and communications?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The law governing international arbitration in Georgia is the Law of Georgia on Arbitration which is based on the UNCITRAL Model Law (as amended in 2006). Georgia adopted the Model Law as a reference to align its arbitration framework with international standards, ensuring consistency for foreign investors and international commercial parties.<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a> While deriving from the UNCITRAL Model Law, in the Law of Georgia on Arbitration, there are some provisions that are different from those of the UNCITRAL Model Law. Some of the differences will be discussed below:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>The scope defined by the Law of Georgia differs from the wording proposed by the UNCITRAL Model Law. In particular, according to the UNCITRAL Model Law, its scope extends to \u201ccommercial\u201d arbitrations. Despite the fact that the adoption of the Georgian Law itself, as well as subsequent amendments to the Law in 2015, served to develop \u201ccommercial\u201d arbitration in the country, the term \u201ccommercial\u201d is not even mentioned by the Georgian legislature.<a href=\"#_ftn2\" name=\"_ftnref2\">[2]<\/a> However, in practice, the scope of \u200b\u200bthe Law extends to arbitration proceedings for commercial disputes as well.<\/li>\n<li>The UNCITRAL Model Law entails, <em>inter alia<\/em>,<em> ad hoc<\/em> The Law of Georgia on Arbitration does not mention <em>ad hoc<\/em> arbitration as such. The status of <em>ad hoc<\/em> arbitration or the name itself is not directly mentioned, nor defined. However, the Law of Georgia on Arbitration recognizes and regulates <em>ad hoc<\/em> arbitration. The Law was amended on March 18, 2015, and according to the current wording, the parties were given the opportunity for <em>ad hoc<\/em> arbitration as well.<\/li>\n<li>The Law of Georgia on Arbitration, in contrast to the UNCITRAL Model Law, sets a specific time limit for a party when making an allegation of exceeding the scope of authority by the arbitral tribunal.<a href=\"#_ftn3\" name=\"_ftnref3\">[3]<\/a> Unlike the UNCITRAL Model Law, Georgian law requires objections concerning an arbitral tribunal&#8217;s alleged excess of authority to be raised within seven days after the relevant circumstances become known.<a href=\"#_ftn4\" name=\"_ftnref4\">[4]<\/a> The UNCITRAL Model Law only declares the following: \u201cA plea that the arbitral tribunal is exceeding the scope of its authority shall be raised <em>as soon as<\/em> the matter alleged to be beyond the scope of its authority is raised during the arbitral proceedings.\u201d<\/li>\n<li>The UNCITRAL Model Law acknowledges the recognition and enforcement of two types of provisional measures: Interim Measures and Preliminary Orders (See Chapter IV A of the UNCITRAL Model Law). In contrast to the UNCITRAL Model Law, the Law of Georgia on Arbitration only acknowledges interim measures as means of provisional measures and ensures its recognition and enforcement (See Article 17-23 of the Law of Georgia on Arbitration). Preliminary Orders are not considered by the Georgian Law.<\/li>\n<li>The law of Georgia also clarifies domestic aspects not explicitly mentioned in the UNCITRAL Model Law, such as the form of arbitration agreements (including electronic notifications under Article 8(5), certain non-arbitrable disputes (criminal, family, bankruptcy, administrative), and procedural rules related to court assistance and enforcement of awards.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>After adopting the Law of Georgia on Arbitration in 2009, several amendments were made to it over the years. The most significant changes were made in 2015, which is why mostly it is referred to as the Reform. There were made some interesting changes in 2017-2018 as well. Further refinements were made in 2022 to clarify arbitral tribunal powers, enforcement of awards, and procedural guarantees.<\/p>\n<p>As of 2026, there are no officially adopted bills pending, but legal scholars and practitioners have proposed incremental reforms to fully harmonize domestic arbitration procedures with international best practices, provide clearer rules on arbitrability (including disputes involving state entities), and enhance recognition and enforcement of foreign awards.<\/p>\n<p>Below will be discussed all the important changes that were made to the Law of Georgia on Arbitration together with the impending plans of amendments to the Law.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>In 2014, the Ministry of Justice of Georgia initiated draft amendments to the Law of Georgia on Arbitration (as of 2009 edition), with the main purpose of making arbitration financially more appealing, legally more certain and overall, closer to international best practice.<a href=\"#_ftn5\" name=\"_ftnref5\">[5]<\/a> The amendments significantly decreased fees for recognition and enforcement of awards and fixed flaws that existed in the 2009 edition of the Law.<a href=\"#_ftn6\" name=\"_ftnref6\">[6]<\/a><\/li>\n<li>The Law of Georgia on Arbitration adopted in 2009 is based on the UNCITRAL Model Law. Prior to March 2015, the Georgian Law did not recognize the possibility of creating <em>ad hoc<\/em> arbitration even on the basis of the expression of the will of the parties and courts also did not recognize <em>ad hoc<\/em> arbitration clauses. However, according to the current version of the wording, the parties were given the opportunity for <em>ad hoc<\/em> Although the Law was amended on 18 March 2015 and the explanatory note to the amendments stated that parties should also have the right to apply to <em>ad hoc<\/em> arbitration (in addition to an institutional arbitration), the direct reference to <em>ad hoc<\/em> arbitration was not made in the Law.<a href=\"#_ftn7\" name=\"_ftnref7\">[7]<\/a> Georgian law recognizes both institutional and ad hoc arbitration. Although ad hoc arbitration is not expressly defined, Article 2(2), as amended in 2015, permits parties to agree on applicable procedural rules, thereby accommodating ad hoc proceedings.<a href=\"#_ftn8\" name=\"_ftnref8\">[8]<\/a> In this case an arbitration agreement between the parties includes the rules of arbitration proceedings to which the parties refer in the arbitration agreement. Also, an agreement between the parties on a specific arbitral institution includes an agreement on the rules of that arbitration institution\u201d.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>At the initiative of the Georgian Association of Arbitrators, relevant proposals have been submitted to the Parliament of Georgia to determine the status of <em>ad hoc<\/em> arbitration and bring other issues in line with international practice and legislation.<a href=\"#_ftn9\" name=\"_ftnref9\">[9]<\/a><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>In accordance with the amendments to the Law of Georgia on Arbitration, made on March 18, 2015, the involvement of the City (District) Court in arbitration activities was reduced and, consequently, the jurisdiction of the Courts of Appeal was increased.<a href=\"#_ftn10\" name=\"_ftnref10\">[10]<\/a> Before these changes the dispute over the jurisdiction of arbitration was discussed by a court of first instance. According to the new amendments, this function was transferred to the courts of appeal.<\/li>\n<li>From July 1, 2017, in accordance with the amendment to the Law of December 21, 2016, a person may not be appointed as an arbitrator when he\/she is a state employee, a state political official, a political official or a public servant.<\/li>\n<li>According to the amendments made to Article 1 (2) of the Law of Georgia on Arbitration by the Parliament of Georgia on May 24, 2018, an arbitral tribunal is entitled to consider a dispute related to a public and private cooperation agreement under the Law of Georgia on Public and Private Cooperation. According to the mentioned Law, such disputes concern infrastructural disputes arising from concession and non-concession public and private cooperation, based on transparency and foresight. However, such disputes were not excluded from the jurisdiction of the courts, meaning these amendments only expanded the arbitral jurisdiction and such disputes may be settled by arbitration in the presence of an arbitration agreement between the parties.<a href=\"#_ftn11\" name=\"_ftnref11\">[11]<\/a><\/li>\n<li>Following the adoption of the Law on Arbitration, the Parliament of Georgia amended the Labor Code, and interested persons were given the opportunity to apply to arbitration to resolve both individual or collective labor disputes in the presence of an arbitration agreement.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>It should be noted that since 2018, Georgian Association of Arbitrators has started to identify those issues that remain a challenge in practice and require legislative changes.<\/p>\n<p>Several changes are essential and serve to eliminate errors in the practice on the one hand and in the law on the other hand, as well as to change the regulations that have proved to be less effective in practice.<\/p>\n<p>Overall, these amendments aim to make Georgia\u2019s arbitration framework modern, internationally compatible, and attractive to foreign and domestic investors, while also addressing practical issues identified by practitioners and the Georgian Association of Arbitrators.<\/p>\n<p>These are, for example, amendments related to Article 2 (ad hoc arbitration), Articles 21-22 (interim measures used by arbitration), Article 11 (alignment with the Law on Mediation and using med-arb, arb-med when there is a clear agreement of the parties), and Article 27 (changing the manner of the notice of arbitration), Article 272<sup>1<\/sup> of the Code of Civil Procedure (when the court examines the arbitration agreement in the context of Article 9 of the Law on Arbitration on rendering a decision on the invalidity of the arbitration agreement in the form of a ruling, introducing the possibility of appeal with the complaint subject to a time limit).<\/p>\n<p>A number of amendments are important as they introduce a new type of regulation, which aims to regulate important issues and increase the attractiveness of Georgia as a place of arbitration. For instance, amendments related to Article 23 (introducing the possibility of interim measures on an arbitration award), Article 32 (allowing the exclusion of the possibility of setting aside of an arbitration award by agreement of the parties when the parties have no connection with Georgia), Articles 356<sup>23<\/sup> and 356<sup>24<\/sup> of the Code of Civil Procedure Articles that will provide for the possibility of cassation appeal of the decision of the appellate court on the setting aside and refusal to recognize-enforce the arbitration award.<\/p>\n<p>Some of the amendments serve to correct technical\/stylistic\/terminological\/translation and other errors and to bring the law in line with the New York Convention and best practices.<\/p>\n<p>The aforementioned amendments are still being discussed and have not yet been brought up in the Parliament. These proposed amendments focus mainly on incremental improvements rather than a complete overhaul, reflecting Georgia\u2019s already modern arbitration law and it compatibly with international standards.<a href=\"#_ftn12\" name=\"_ftnref12\">[12]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>Georgia has not yet adopted the amendments to the UNCITRAL Model Law concerning arbitral awards and notices of arbitration in electronic form, adopted by UNCITRAL in July 2026.<\/p>\n<p>On July 2026, UNCITRAL adopted key texts addressing the use of electronic arbitral awards and electronic notices of arbitration, including amendments to relevant provisions of the UNCITRAL Model Law and a Recommendation concerning the interpretation of the New York Convention in relation to electronic arbitral awards.<a href=\"#_ftn13\" name=\"_ftnref13\">[13]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>The Law of Georgia on Arbitration already recognizes the use of electronic communications in arbitration. In particular, the Law defines an \u201celectronic notification\u201d broadly and expressly includes information sent or received by electronic mail. However, the current Law does not expressly provide for arbitral awards to be issued in electronic form. Article 39(2) requires an arbitral award to be made in writing and signed by the arbitrator or arbitrators, while Article 44 contains requirements concerning the submission of the original or a duly certified copy of an arbitral award for recognition and enforcement.<a href=\"#_ftn14\" name=\"_ftnref14\">[14]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>Although Georgian arbitration practitioners have participated in discussions concerning the development of rules on electronic awards and communications at the UNCITRAL level, there is currently no publicly available Georgian legislative initiative specifically providing for the incorporation of the July 2026 UNCITRAL amendments into the Law of Georgia on Arbitration.<\/p>\n<p>Accordingly, as of September 2026, the July 2026 amendments have not been incorporated into Georgian arbitration legislation.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> <em>Negi, Chitranjali<\/em>, Unlocking Potential: International Arbitration Trends in Central Asia and Caucasus (August 14, 2024). Available at SSRN: https:\/\/ssrn.com\/abstract=4926177 or http:\/\/dx.doi.org\/10.2139\/ssrn.4926177<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref2\" name=\"_ftn2\">[2]<\/a> <em>Titberidze<\/em>, <em>Giorgi<\/em>, The Law of Georgia on Arbitration, Commentary, Second Edition, Tbilisi 2020, p. 23<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref3\" name=\"_ftn3\">[3]<\/a> <em>Ibid<\/em>., p. 104<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref4\" name=\"_ftn4\">[4]<\/a> Law of Georgia on Arbitration, Article 16(3);<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref5\" name=\"_ftn5\">[5]<\/a> Legal and Practical Aspects of Arbitration in Georgia, The Study, February 2018, Caucasus Research Resource Centre Georgia, p. 5<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref6\" name=\"_ftn6\">[6]<\/a> <em>Ibid.<\/em><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref7\" name=\"_ftn7\">[7]<\/a> According to the Explanatory Note, as a result of amending this Article, \u201cthe parties will have an opportunity to address an arbitral tribunal (ad hoc) established for the purposes of resolution of a specific dispute, as provided under the UNCITRAL Model Law.\u201d<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref8\" name=\"_ftn8\">[8]<\/a> Law of Georgia on Arbitration, Article 2(2)<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref9\" name=\"_ftn9\">[9]<\/a> <em>Titberidze<\/em>, <em>Giorgi<\/em>, The Law of Georgia on Arbitration, Commentary, Second Edition, Tbilisi 2020, p. 4<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref10\" name=\"_ftn10\">[10]<\/a> <em>Ibid.<\/em>, p. 41<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref11\" name=\"_ftn11\">[11]<\/a> <em>Ibid.<\/em><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref12\" name=\"_ftn12\">[12]<\/a> <em>Negi, Chitranjali<\/em>, Unlocking Potential: International Arbitration Trends in Central Asia and Caucasus (August 14, 2024). Available at SSRN: https:\/\/ssrn.com\/abstract=4926177 or http:\/\/dx.doi.org\/10.2139\/ssrn.4926177<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref13\" name=\"_ftn13\">[13]<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/unis.unvienna.org\/unis\/en\/pressrels\/2026\/unisl399.html\">Official Website of UNCITRAL<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref14\" name=\"_ftn14\">[14]<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.matsne.gov.ge\/en\/document\/view\/89284?publication=8\">The Law of Georgia on Arbitration<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What arbitral institutions (if any) exist in your country? When were their rules last amended? Are any amendments being considered?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>In Georgia, parties can resolve disputes through institutional arbitration administered by established arbitral institutions, or through ad hoc arbitration under the Law of Georgia on Arbitration. Together, these options provide flexibility and align the country\u2019s arbitration framework with international norms.<\/p>\n<p>There are three leading arbitral institutions in Georgia:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li><strong><u> Georgian International Arbitration Centre (GIAC)<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a><\/u><\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>Georgian International Arbitration Centre (hereinafter referred to as GIAC) is the first non-profit arbitral institution created in Georgia. It was established as a non-commercial non-profit legal entity. While being the first Georgian international arbitral institution, GIAC is considered to be the most efficient dispute resolution institution in the entire Caucasus \u2013 Black Sea \u2013 Caspian Region. GIAC Secretariat as well as GIAC Arbitration Council is well-organized with group of highly experienced arbitration lawyers and practitioners.<\/p>\n<p>GIAC was founded in December 2013 by Georgian Chamber of Commerce and Industry \u2013 the organization who supports and advocates the interests of business entities in Georgia. Although, GIAC is structurally independent from its founder \u2013 Georgian Chamber of Commerce and Industry and is a completely independent and neutral arbitral institution in all its activities.<\/p>\n<p>GIAC\u2019s main function is to administer commercial arbitration disputes and GIAC Arbitration may take place in any country, in any language and with any independent and impartial arbitrators of any nationality.<\/p>\n<p>GIAC actively cooperates with other international arbitral institutions and internationally recognized arbitration practitioners.<\/p>\n<p>GIAC Arbitration Rules are drafted with the active involvement of recognized international arbitration practitioners. Their rules are mostly designed for international disputes but are well suited for domestic arbitration as well. The GIAC Rules encompass recent developments and well-tried provisions creating a modern set of rules and reflecting the needs of the parties.<\/p>\n<p>The GIAC Arbitration Rules were last amended on 12 April\u00a02024. There are no amendments being considered in the near future. In addition GIAC periodically reviews its rules to align with international best practices, including provisions for emergency arbitrators, electronic communications, and confidentiality. These measures ensure that GIAC arbitration is compatible with UNCITRAL, ICC, and other leading international standards.<\/p>\n<ol start=\"2\">\n<li><strong><u> Tbilisi Arbitration Institute<a href=\"#_ftn2\" name=\"_ftnref2\">[2]<\/a><\/u><\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>Tbilisi Arbitration Institute is one of the oldest Georgian arbitrations, which was established in 2009 in parallel with the implementation of a major arbitration reform. Considering its ethical commitment and rendered awards that always share the best international practice, Tbilisi Arbitration Institute is acknowledged as one of the leadings in Georgia. Tbilisi Arbitration Institute ensures to constantly develop its service and, by adhering to its ethics and principles, offers customers high quality services. Its services include: Mediation, Arbitration, Med-Arb, Negotiations.<\/p>\n<p>Tbilisi Arbitration Institute has considered over 3 000 cases.<\/p>\n<p>The Tbilisi Arbitration Institute Arbitration Rules were last amended on 1 July\u00a02026.<\/p>\n<p>Tbilisi Arbitration Institute continuously monitors international developments in arbitration, and amendments to its rules have been designed to improve efficiency, address electronic arbitration procedures, and strengthen interim measures. While no major amendments are currently planned, the institution regularly reviews its rules to ensure alignment with international standards.<\/p>\n<ol start=\"3\">\n<li><strong><u> DRC \u2013 Dispute Resolution Center<a href=\"#_ftn3\" name=\"_ftnref3\">[3]<\/a><\/u><\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>Dispute Resolution Center (hereinafter referred to as DRC) was established in 2008 and is a center of alternative means of resolution of disputes. DRC offers two mechanisms for resolutions of disputes: the arbitration and the mediation.<\/p>\n<p>DRC takes pride in managing to develop the center distinguished by its<br \/>\n\u2013independence;<br \/>\n\u2013qualification;<br \/>\n\u2013high standards of services.<\/p>\n<p>The DRC Rules went into force on 1 June\u00a02016. The Rules were last amended on 20 February 2023. DRC also follows international arbitration standards and provides parties the option of ad hoc arbitration, ensuring flexibility and compatibility with global practices. The institution periodically evaluates its rules to maintain fairness, efficiency, and impartiality.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> Official website: &lt;<a href=\"https:\/\/giac.ge\/\">https:\/\/giac.ge\/<\/a>&gt;<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref2\" name=\"_ftn2\">[2]<\/a> Official website: &lt;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.taiarbitration.com\/\">https:\/\/www.taiarbitration.com\/<\/a>&gt;<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref3\" name=\"_ftn3\">[3]<\/a> Official website: &lt;<a href=\"http:\/\/drc-arbitration.ge\/\">http:\/\/drc-arbitration.ge\/<\/a>&gt;<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Is there a specialist arbitration court in your country?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>There is no specialist arbitration court in Georgia. Even without a separate arbitration court, disputes related to arbitration are handled by ordinary courts, mainly civil courts, under the Law of Georgia on Arbitration and the Civil Procedure Code. Courts assist in arbitration by confirming or challenging arbitration agreements, appointing arbitrators if parties fail to do so, granting interim measures, recognizing and enforcing arbitral awards, and handling setting aside (annulment) of awards.<\/p>\n<p>However, the 11\/08\/2020 Resolution of the High Council of Justice of Georgia on the definition of narrow specialization of judges in the Chambers of Civil, Administrative and Criminal Cases of the Tbilisi Court of Appeal<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a> defines the authority of judges to consider arbitration cases.<\/p>\n<p>The Resolution expressly provides for the narrow specialization of judges within the Civil Chamber of the Tbilisi Court of Appeal in arbitration-related matters, including applications for provisional measures submitted before the commencement of arbitral proceedings. This specialization is justified by the particularly heavy caseload of the Court of Appeal, the categories of cases requiring collegial adjudication, and the number of judges available.<a href=\"#_ftn2\" name=\"_ftnref2\">[2]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>Therefore, in the Tbilisi Court of Appeal, there are specialized judges who consider arbitration cases.<\/p>\n<p>The 11\/08\/2020 Resolution defines the narrow specialization of only judges of the Tbilisi Court of Appeal.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> The 11\/08\/2020 Resolution is available at: &lt;<a href=\"http:\/\/hcoj.gov.ge\/Uploads\/2021\/4\/10.pdf\">http:\/\/hcoj.gov.ge\/Uploads\/2021\/4\/10.pdf<\/a>&gt;<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref2\" name=\"_ftn2\">[2]<\/a> High Council of Justice of Georgia, Resolution of 11 August 2020, Article 1(a.d).<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What are the validity requirements for an arbitration agreement under the laws of your country?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Under Georgian law, an arbitration agreement must be in writing and may take the form of a contractual clause or a separate agreement. The writing requirement is broadly interpreted and may be satisfied through electronic communications, an exchange of pleadings acknowledging the agreement, or incorporation by reference. However, where a natural person or an administrative body is a party, the agreement must be contained in a document signed by both parties, and certain alternative methods of satisfying the writing requirement do not apply.<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>An arbitration agreement must also satisfy the general requirements for the validity of transactions under Georgian civil law. Its essential elements include the parties&#8217; clear consent to arbitration and identification of the legal relationship to which the agreement applies.<\/p>\n<p>Georgian courts also interpret arbitration agreements in line with the UNCITRAL Model Law. They generally uphold arbitration agreements even if the main contract is contested, as long as the arbitration agreement itself meets the legal requirements. Oral agreements are generally unenforceable, and the writing requirement remains fundamental.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cArbitration agreement is a private-legal agreement on choosing the form of procedural relations. It can be signed both independently and as one of the conditions of the contractual relationship between the parties. Any agreement by which the parties wish to consider the existing dispute between them by arbitration must contain the minimum for its qualification as an arbitration agreement, in particular, the arbitration agreement must clearly state the desire of the parties to submit the dispute arising from the existing legal relationship to the relevant arbitration for consideration, and not General Courts. This agreement must also specify precisely which legal relationship the dispute is to be arbitrated, and it must be possible to identify the arbitrator who is going to hear the dispute\u201d.<a href=\"#_ftn2\" name=\"_ftnref2\">[2]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>Courts also require that the parties have legal capacity and that the agreement is entered into freely, without duress or fraud. Any challenge to the validity of an arbitration agreement is therefore assessed under general contract law principles, such as illegality, incapacity, or lack of consent.<\/p>\n<p>The consideration of the form was and still is of fundamental importance due to the special legal consequences that arise from the arbitration agreement, meaning that the denial by a party of the right to apply to a court in favor of arbitration must be recorded in an appropriate form.<a href=\"#_ftn3\" name=\"_ftnref3\">[3]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>An arbitration agreement is a private law agreement. It is a transaction in writing provided for in the Civil Code of Georgia. Therefore, in terms of substance, arbitration agreement shall meet the requirements of the Civil Code of Georgia on transaction.<a href=\"#_ftn4\" name=\"_ftnref4\">[4]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>Under the Law, the essential terms of an arbitration agreement (<em>essentialia negotii<\/em>) include only the following:<a href=\"#_ftn5\" name=\"_ftnref5\">[5]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>a) the agreement of the parties to submit the dispute to arbitration for consideration;<\/p>\n<p>b) a defined legal relationship which is to be considered by the arbitral tribunal.<\/p>\n<p>In practice, Georgian courts are arbitration-friendly, tending to favor enforcements of valid arbitration agreements in line with international standards and the New York Convention.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> Law of Georgia on Arbitration, Article 8(1)-(8).<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref2\" name=\"_ftn2\">[2]<\/a> The Supreme Court of Georgia, Case No \u2116 \u10d0\u10e1-1192-1052-2010, January 17, 2011<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref3\" name=\"_ftn3\">[3]<\/a> <em>Tsertsvadze<\/em>, <em>Giorgi<\/em>, Prerequisites of International Arbitration Process (Comparative Analysis), 2008, p.138<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref4\" name=\"_ftn4\">[4]<\/a> <em>See e.g.<\/em> The Supreme Court of Georgia, Case No \u10d0\u10e1-148-140-2017, January 18, 2018<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref5\" name=\"_ftn5\">[5]<\/a> Group of Authors, Sophie Tkemaladze (Scientific Editor), Arbitration Guide for the First Instance Courts, Arbitration Initiative Georgia, EU4Justice, UNDP Georgia (2017), p. 34<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are arbitration clauses considered separable from the main contract?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Separability of the arbitration clause is recognized by the legal system of Georgia. This principle is incorporated in the Law of Georgia on Arbitration. Georgian law expressly recognizes the separability of arbitration agreements. Accordingly, an arbitration clause is treated as legally independent of the underlying contract, and the invalidity of that contract does not automatically invalidate the arbitration clause.<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>In practice, Georgian courts will uphold arbitration clauses even if the main contract is disputed, terminated, or challenged. Arbitrators themselves have the competence to rule on their own jurisdiction, including disputes over the validity of the arbitration agreement.<a href=\"#_ftn2\" name=\"_ftnref2\">[2]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>Within Georgia&#8217;s legal framework, the principle of separability holds a significant place, especially in matters pertaining to arbitration. This principle asserts that an arbitration clause, though an integral part of a larger contract, maintains its distinct legal identity. It possesses the ability to withstand challenges to the main contract, thus reaffirming the authority of arbitration agreements in navigating contractual disputes. This approach aligns Georgia with international arbitration standards, including the UNCITRAL Model Law and the New York Convention, ensuring that arbitration agreements are not easily nullified due to disputes concerning the underlying contract.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> Law of Georgia on Arbitration, Article 16(1).<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref2\" name=\"_ftn2\">[2]<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.ibanet.org\/document?id=Georgia-country-guide-arbitration&amp;utm_source\">The International Bar Association&#8217;s Arbitration Guide for Georgia<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Do the courts of your country apply a validation principle under which an arbitration agreement should be considered valid and enforceable if it would be so considered under at least one of the national laws potentially applicable to it?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>A validation principle as such has not been recognized nor applied by Georgian courts. Georgian courts respect any explicit (or even implicit) choice of law by the parties with reference to their arbitration agreement. However, in practice, courts tend to give effect to arbitration agreements if they would be valid under at least one national law potentially applicable to the agreement, particularly in international contracts. This approach ensures that arbitration agreements are not easily invalidated due to conflicts of law or the choice of a foreign governing law, reflecting a pro-arbitration stance consistent with international standards and the New York Convention.<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>There are some recommendations stated in literature, some scholarly opinions and guides based on international standards and experience regarding the case when no such choice has been made.<\/p>\n<p>According to the Arbitration Guide for the First Instance Courts, when deciding upon the validity of the arbitration agreement, the courts shall consider the following:<a href=\"#_ftn2\" name=\"_ftnref2\">[2]<\/a><\/p>\n<p><strong><u>1) The law of the place of arbitration (or the place of rendering arbitral award);<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>This is the most common approach. The parties&#8217; choice of the place of arbitration is considered to be an implicit agreement of the parties to apply the law of the place of arbitration to the arbitration agreement (<em>lex arbitri<\/em>). Georgian legislation stipulates that during the process of the recognition-enforcement of arbitral awards, the validity\/invalidity of the arbitration agreement shall be regulated by the law determined by the parties in the arbitration agreement, and if they haven\u2019t determined it, then the law of the place of rendering arbitral award (or the place of arbitration) shall apply. Regarding the arbitral awards rendered in the territory of Georgia, the law explicitly states that the Georgian law is applied when determining the validity\/invalidity of the arbitration clause. If the award is rendered in Georgia, then the legislation of Georgia shall apply to the arbitration agreement, which is the basis of this award. In the case of ongoing arbitrations in a foreign country, the law of the country where the arbitration will take place (and, consequently, an arbitral award will be rendered) shall apply when deciding upon the validity of the arbitration clauses.<\/p>\n<p><strong><u>2) The law applicable to the principal contract;<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Nowadays, the prevailing view is that the determination of the law applicable to the principal contract does not necessarily imply that the parties have made the same choice as to the law applicable to the arbitration agreement. Such view is based on the principle of separability of the arbitration agreement according to which the principal contract and the arbitration agreement are two separate agreements.<\/p>\n<p><strong><u>3) National legislation (in certain cases).<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The parties may indirectly indicate the applicable law at the stage of the court hearing. For example, if a party indicates the invalidity of an arbitration agreement under Georgian law, while the opposing party does not indicate to apply another law and instead discusses the validity of the arbitration agreement also under Georgian law, the court may apply Georgian law to determine the validity of the arbitration agreement. However, this approach is used only in extreme cases, when it is clear that both parties want the issue to be considered under chosen (in this case Georgian) law.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.ibanet.org\/document?id=Georgia-country-guide-arbitration&amp;utm_source\">The International Bar Association&#8217;s Arbitration Guide for Georgia<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref2\" name=\"_ftn2\">[2]<\/a> Group of Authors, Sophie Tkemaladze (Scientific Editor), Arbitration Guide for the First Instance Courts, Arbitration Initiative Georgia, EU4Justice, UNDP Georgia (2017), pp. 14-19<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are asymmetric arbitration clauses \u2013 for instance, where one party has the right to choose between arbitration or litigation while the other party does not have this option \u2013 valid in your jurisdiction?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Georgian law does not expressly regulate asymmetric arbitration clauses. However, Georgian judicial authority has emphasised that an arbitration agreement is a neutral procedural agreement by which the parties jointly and on equal terms determine the mechanism for resolving their disputes. Against that background, Georgian legal commentary and court guidance generally regard a clause granting only one party the unilateral option to choose between arbitration and litigation as inconsistent with the principle of equality and therefore vulnerable to being held unenforceable.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">In what instances can third parties or non-signatories be bound by an arbitration agreement? Are there any recent court decisions on these issues?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Georgian law does not contain a general statutory regime governing the extension of arbitration agreements to non-signatories. A non-signatory may nevertheless become bound in circumstances recognised under general private-law principles, including legal succession, inheritance, assignment of a claim, assumption of debt or transfer of a contractual position, depending on the nature of the relevant transfer and the arbitration agreement. Georgian case law on extension of arbitration agreements beyond these situations remains limited.<\/p>\n<p>Georgian courts generally follow principles of fairness, party autonomy, and international practice, allowing non-signatories to be bound in certain circumstances such as assignment, agency, or corporate group affiliation. This aligns Georgia arbitration practice with international standards.<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> International Bar Association, Arbitration Guide: Georgia; Georgian International Arbitration Centre (GIAC) Arbitration Rules (2017)<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are there any recent court decisions and\/or legislative reform in your country concerning the choice of law applicable to an arbitration agreement where no such law has been specified by the Parties?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>There are no recent court decisions or legislative reforms in Georgia specifically addressing the determination of the law applicable to an arbitration agreement where the parties have not specified such law. however, there are some recommendations given in different literature or guides on how the court should act at this time.<\/p>\n<p>In practice, Georgian courts generally follow principles of party autonomy and conflict of laws. If the parties have not specified a law, courts often apply the law of the place of arbitration as the default, or consider the law governing the principal contract only if consistent with the separability of the arbitration clause. Courts may also apply Georgian law indirectly if both parties discuss the validity of the arbitration agreement under Georgian law during proceedings.<\/p>\n<p>In particular, in order to determine the law applicable to the arbitration agreement, the court shall pay attention to the following circumstances:<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a><\/p>\n<ol>\n<li>Where the arbitral award will be rendered i.e. where the arbitration will take place;<\/li>\n<li>Whether the parties agreed on the law applicable to the principal contract;<\/li>\n<li>Whether the action of the parties indicate\/imply the application of any law.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>This approach ensures that arbitration agreements are upheld wherever possible, maintaining compliance with international standards, including the New York Convention, and preventing invalidation merely due to the absence of a choice-of-law clause.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> Group of Authors, Sophie Tkemaladze (Scientific Editor), Arbitration Guide for the First Instance Courts, Arbitration Initiative Georgia, EU4Justice, UNDP Georgia (2017), p. 14<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">How is the law applicable to the substance determined? Is there a specific set of choice of law rules in your country?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Primarily, the law applicable to the substance of a dispute is determined by the agreement of the parties. This includes not only rules provided for in various national legal systems, but includes also other sources of law, such as general principles of commercial law, <em>lex mercatoria<\/em>, etc.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>This is supported by the general rules under the Law of Georgia on Private International Law, which explicitly recognize party autonomy in choice of law. If the parties do not specify a law, the tribunal may determine the applicable law based on the closest connection, <em>lex loci solutinis<\/em>, or <em>lex loci contractus<\/em>.<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>Georgian law recognizes party autonomy in determining the substantive rules applicable to a dispute. In the absence of an agreement, the arbitral tribunal may determine the applicable rules of law. In all cases, the tribunal must also consider the contractual terms and relevant trade usages.<a href=\"#_ftn2\" name=\"_ftnref2\">[2]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>This issue is highly relevant in the case of contracts in which one of the parties is a natural or legal person of a foreign country. If the participants in the arbitration process are residents of Georgia, the applicable law will be Georgian law. The parties to the international arbitration proceedings may agree on the rules of law applicable to both the main contract and the arbitration agreement. Such an agreement shall be enclosed in the main contract of the parties. In the absence of such reference to the law applicable to the arbitration agreement in the main contract, the law chosen by the parties applies only to the main contract, hence the principle of the separability of the arbitration agreement from the main contract.<a href=\"#_ftn3\" name=\"_ftnref3\">[3]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>The Georgian legislature has not provided the tribunal\u2019s right to rule <em>ex aequo et bono<\/em> or <em>amiable compositeur<\/em>.<a href=\"#_ftn4\" name=\"_ftnref4\">[4]<\/a> In the absence of an agreement of the parties, the arbitral tribunal is entitled to determine and apply the law it considers appropriate in the circumstances. According to Article 36 (2) of the Law of Georgia on Arbitration, \u201cIn the absence of the agreement of the parties, the rules of law that are determined by the arbitral tribunal shall be used during the\u00a0arbitration\u00a0proceeding\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>Set of choice of law rules do exist in Georgia, namely the Law of Georgia on Private International Law. Despite its exclusive applicability to courts\u2019 conduct, it may nevertheless be relevant when deciding upon the applicable substantive law to the arbitration agreement. However, in accordance with the aforementioned passage, this is quite a controversial issue.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>In practice, while the Private International Law primarily governs courts, its principles are applied by arbitral tribunal when the parties have not chosen a law. This ensures consistency with international standards and the recognition of arbitral awards under the New York Convention.<a href=\"#_ftn5\" name=\"_ftnref5\">[5]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>Even under the terms of the agreement between the parties, the arbitral tribunal shall take into account the commercial customs and traditions applicable to such an agreement when making its decision.<a href=\"#_ftn6\" name=\"_ftnref6\">[6]<\/a> This is in compliance with the provision of Article 339 of the Civil Code of Georgia, as well as Article 28 (4) of the UNCITRAL Model Law, according to which \u201cIn all cases, the arbitral tribunal shall decide in accordance with the terms of the contract and shall take into account the usages of the trade applicable to the transaction\u201d.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> International Bar Association, Arbitration Guide: Georgia; Law of Georgia on Private International Law.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref2\" name=\"_ftn2\">[2]<\/a> Law of Georgia on Arbitration, Article 36(1), (2) and (4).<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref3\" name=\"_ftn3\">[3]<\/a> <em>Titberidze<\/em>, <em>Giorgi<\/em>, The Law of Georgia on Arbitration, Commentary, Second Edition, Tbilisi 2020, pp. 167-169<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref4\" name=\"_ftn4\">[4]<\/a> <em>Tsertsvadze<\/em>, <em>Giorgi<\/em>, Brief Commentary to The Georgian Arbitration Law 2009, Publishing House \u201cUNIVERSAL\u201d, Tbilisi 2011, p. 145<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref5\" name=\"_ftn5\">[5]<\/a> Law of Georgia on Private International Law; New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (1958)<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref6\" name=\"_ftn6\">[6]<\/a> <em>Titberidze<\/em>, <em>Giorgi<\/em>, The Law of Georgia on Arbitration, Commentary, Second Edition, Tbilisi 2020, p. 172<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">In your country, are there any particular requirements for and\/or restrictions in the appointment of arbitrators?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Georgian law does not impose nationality requirements or a general requirement that an arbitrator be a lawyer or possess any particular professional qualification. The parties may, however, agree on specific qualifications. In addition, Article 11(7) of the Law of Georgia on Arbitration identifies certain categories of persons who may not be appointed as arbitrators..<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>The Law does not prescribe any specific requirements or rules of procedure as to how the parties or a court should appoint arbitrators. However, the law explicitly excludes certain individuals from appointments, such as state employees, political officials, public servants, and persons who have a direct conflict of interest in the dispute. These restrictions ensure the independence and impartiality of the arbitral tribunal, in line with Articles 11 and 12 of the Law of Georgia on Arbitration.<a href=\"#_ftn2\" name=\"_ftnref2\">[2]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>However, it does specify the cases in which the candidacy of an arbitrator may not be considered. Georgian law does not impose general nationality or professional qualification requirements on arbitrators, although the parties may agree on specific qualifications. Statutory restrictions apply to certain persons, including individuals subject to relevant legal-capacity restrictions, public officials and civil servants, persons with unexpunged criminal convictions, and individuals who acted as mediators in the same or a substantially related dispute.<a href=\"#_ftn3\" name=\"_ftnref3\">[3]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>In \u200b\u200baddition, according to Article 14<sup>9<\/sup> (2) of the Law on Enforcement Proceedings, \u201cA private bailiff cannot be a member of arbitration.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>When appointing an arbitrator by a court or other institution, the law requires that the qualification requirements agreed upon by the parties be taken into account. The steps taken by them must be in line with the purpose set. As a rule, the parties may have specific requirements for arbitrators, therefore they should have criteria in which cases this or that arbitrator is preferred. The parties may also nominate arbitrators by sending a list of arbitrators to the relevant institution, or the institution itself may provide for the nomination of arbitrators. Additionally, institutional rules (e.g., GIAC) may impose further qualifications or eligibility criteria for arbitrators, supplementing the statutory requirements.<a href=\"#_ftn4\" name=\"_ftnref4\">[4]<\/a> The institution may also apply to the Georgian Association of Arbitrators, which may be a good source to obtain an initial list of arbitrators.<a href=\"#_ftn5\" name=\"_ftnref5\">[5]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>Proper competence, neutrality, independence and impartiality &#8211; these are considered the most important requirements that an arbitrator participating in the arbitration process shall have.<\/p>\n<p>Under the Law of Georgia on Arbitration, it is inadmissible to appoint a person as an arbitrator without his consent. A written consent of the arbitrator to participate as an arbitrator in the case is a mandatory requirement. This rule applies even when the candidates for arbitration are selected from the list of any arbitral institution. Being on the arbitrator&#8217;s list itself does not mean her\/his consent to take part in the arbitration proceeding in resolving any dispute.<a href=\"#_ftn6\" name=\"_ftnref6\">[6]<\/a> In addition to the above, the arbitrator himself\/herself shall provide the institution\/court with a declaration relating to its good faith, impartiality, independence and neutrality. Also, one shall state whether there are any factors prescribed in the law that preclude the possibility of appointing a person as an arbitrator.<a href=\"#_ftn7\" name=\"_ftnref7\">[7]<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> Group of Authors, Sophie Tkemaladze (Scientific Editor), Arbitration Guide for the First Instance Courts, Arbitration Initiative Georgia, EU4Justice, UNDP Georgia (2017), p.76<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref2\" name=\"_ftn2\">[2]<\/a> Law of Georgia on Arbitration; International Bar Association, Arbitration Guide: Georgia<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref3\" name=\"_ftn3\">[3]<\/a> Law of Georgia on Arbitration, Article 11(7)<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref4\" name=\"_ftn4\">[4]<\/a> Georgian International Arbitration Centre (GIAC) Arbitration Rules (2024).<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref5\" name=\"_ftn5\">[5]<\/a> Group of Authors, Sophie Tkemaladze (Scientific Editor), Arbitration Guide for the First Instance Courts, Arbitration Initiative Georgia, EU4Justice, UNDP Georgia (2017), pp.76-81<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref6\" name=\"_ftn6\">[6]<\/a> <em>Ibid.<\/em><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref7\" name=\"_ftn7\">[7]<\/a> <em>Ibid.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Can the local courts intervene in the selection of arbitrators? If so, how?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The parties have the right to determine the identity or number of arbitrators and the rules for appointing them. If the parties fail to appoint an arbitrator within the agreed time frame, or if the agreed procedure cannot be followed, Georgian courts can intervene to appoint arbitrators. The intervention is regulated by Article 11(3) of the Law of Georgia on Arbitration, and the court\u2019s decision is final and not subject to appeal.<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a> However, there may be a case where they didn\u2019t or couldn\u2019t agree on the procedure for appointing arbitrators, or the procedure for appointing arbitrators provided by them failed to carry out. In such cases, the law provides that one of the parties is entitled to apply to the court and request the appointment of arbitrator(s). Thus, the court intervenes in the selection of arbitrators when the applicable procedural law directly requires it.<\/p>\n<p>In the case of institutional arbitration, the parties have the right to apply to the court if they have a written agreement that they do not recognize the arbitration rules of the arbitral institution in the appointment of the arbitrator(s) and that they will apply to the court in case of disagreement.<a href=\"#_ftn2\" name=\"_ftnref2\">[2]<\/a> In the case of institutional arbitration, it is also possible for the parties to apply to the court, when for one reason or another the arbitral institution fails to appoint an arbitrator.<a href=\"#_ftn3\" name=\"_ftnref3\">[3]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>The court judgment on the appointment of arbitrator(s) shall be final and without appeal. Therefore, it is important that the parties themselves are involved in the process of appointing arbitrators. This will give the parties the opportunity to express their views on the candidates for arbitration in advance, which will ensure, as far as possible, that the selected candidate is impartial and independent and suitable for the case.<a href=\"#_ftn4\" name=\"_ftnref4\">[4]<\/a> It is essential that the court, when considering the appointment of an arbitrator, pay attention to whether the parties have agreed on any requirements for the appointment of arbitrators. The court shall assess the merits of the parties&#8217; positions and then make a decision on the appointment of a specific arbitrator.<a href=\"#_ftn5\" name=\"_ftnref5\">[5]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>When selecting a candidate for the appointment of an arbitrator, the court shall take into account the following:<a href=\"#_ftn6\" name=\"_ftnref6\">[6]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>1) Criteria to be met by the arbitrator;<\/p>\n<p>2) Whether the person is prohibited to be an arbitrator by law;<\/p>\n<p>3) What may be the source of selection of arbitrator candidates;<\/p>\n<p>4) Whether the candidate agrees to be an arbitrator;<\/p>\n<p>5) The importance of the involvement of the parties in the process of appointing an arbitrator.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> Law of Georgia on Arbitration, article 11(3)<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref2\" name=\"_ftn2\">[2]<\/a> <em>Titberidze<\/em>, <em>Giorgi<\/em>, The Law of Georgia on Arbitration, Commentary, Second Edition, Tbilisi 2020, p. 73<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref3\" name=\"_ftn3\">[3]<\/a> <em>Ibid.<\/em><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref4\" name=\"_ftn4\">[4]<\/a> Group of Authors, Sophie Tkemaladze (Scientific Editor), Arbitration Guide for the First Instance Courts, Arbitration Initiative Georgia, EU4Justice, UNDP Georgia (2017), p.80<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref5\" name=\"_ftn5\">[5]<\/a> <em>Ibid<\/em>., p.81<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref6\" name=\"_ftn6\">[6]<\/a> <em>Ibid<\/em>., pp. 75-76<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Can the appointment of an arbitrator be challenged? What are the grounds for such a challenge? What is the procedure for such a challenge?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>An arbitrator may be challenged where they lack qualifications agreed upon by the parties or where circumstances give rise to reasonable doubts concerning their independence or impartiality. Arbitrators are also subject to a continuing duty of disclosure.<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>The parties may agree on a challenge procedure. In the absence of such agreement, a challenge must generally be submitted to the arbitral tribunal within 15 days after the relevant circumstances become known. If rejected, the challenge may be referred to the competent court within 30 days. In proceedings before a sole arbitrator, the party may apply directly to the court. The court must decide within 14 days, and its decision is final. Pending the court&#8217;s determination, arbitration proceedings may continue.<a href=\"#_ftn2\" name=\"_ftnref2\">[2]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>If a party has not filed a statement for the challenge of the arbitrator during the arbitration proceedings, its ability to request such challenge at the enforcement stage is precluded. As emphasized in the following court decision:<\/p>\n<p>\u201cIn this case, it is confirmed by the case materials that the opposing party did not file a statement of challenge of the arbitrator at the stage of the arbitration proceedings, therefore, based on the reasoning developed in paragraphs 26, 27 and 28 of the present ruling, it is deprived of the opportunity to recognize and enforce such a claim of the arbitration decision\u201d.<a href=\"#_ftn3\" name=\"_ftnref3\">[3]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>Under Georgian law, challenges must be made promptly after the circumstances giving rise to the challenge become known. Arbitrators are required to disclose any factors affecting their independence or impartiality. In institutional arbitrations (such as GIAC), the institution\u2019s rules may set additional timelines or procedures. If the arbitrator or the other parties contest the challenge, the court of competent jurisdiction resolves the matter, and its decision is final and binding. This ensures that challenges are dealt with efficiently, while allowing the arbitration to continue if appropriate.<a href=\"#_ftn4\" name=\"_ftnref4\">[4]<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> Law of Georgia on Arbitration, Article 12<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref2\" name=\"_ftn2\">[2]<\/a> Law of Georgia on Arbitration, Article 13<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref3\" name=\"_ftn3\">[3]<\/a> The Supreme Court of Georgia, Case No \u2116\u10d0-3947-\u10e8-93-2020, October 26, 2020<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref4\" name=\"_ftn4\">[4]<\/a> Law of Georgia on Arbitration, Articles 12-13; Georgian International Arbitration Centre (GIAC) Arbitration Rules (2017), Articles 14-16<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Have there been any recent developments concerning the duty of independence and impartiality of the arbitrators, including the duty of disclosure?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Early in 2013, the Georgian Association of Arbitrators (hereinafter referred to as <strong>\u201cGAA\u201d<\/strong>) was established.<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a> It is the first professional body of arbitrators in Georgia. With the aim of maintaining high standard and building confidence in arbitration throughout Georgia, in June 2014, GAA developed and adopted a Code of Ethics for Arbitrators with the support of international experts. The Code of Ethics sets out the ethical standards and obligations for arbitrators that is to ensure that they practice arbitration in a fair and just manner, the arbitration process is conducted fairly and in good faith, as well as to maintain neutrality, impartiality and independence of arbitrators themselves and to oblige them to disclose any interests or relationships i.e. any conflict of interest that may affect their impartiality and influence their judgment.<a href=\"#_ftn2\" name=\"_ftnref2\">[2]<\/a> It also sets communication rules for arbitrators and dispute parties in order to avoid excessive and unnecessary expenses.<a href=\"#_ftn3\" name=\"_ftnref3\">[3]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>In 2018, the GAA\u2019s Ethics Committee was established and Disciplinary Rules were introduced with the support of both EU and UNDP. This means that the enforcement mechanism has been created. In particular, a violation of the Code of Ethics can lead to disciplinary proceedings before the GAA\u2019s Ethics Committee that can impose sanctions ranging from confidential recommendations to expulsion from the GAA.<a href=\"#_ftn4\" name=\"_ftnref4\">[4]<\/a> GAA\u2019s Ethics Committee has the power to react to arbitration cases handled by non-GAA members.<a href=\"#_ftn5\" name=\"_ftnref5\">[5]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>The Code of Ethics of Arbitrators and the Regulations define the norms of ethics for arbitrators and establish the obligation of arbitrators to ensure that the arbitration process is conducted in good faith and fairly, to maintain neutrality, impartiality and independence, to disclose any interest or relationship that may affect their impartiality.<a href=\"#_ftn6\" name=\"_ftnref6\">[6]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>The GAA Code of Ethics establishes specific ethical standards governing an arbitrator\u2019s independence, impartiality, competence, and availability. Under Principle I(2), an individual should accept an appointment as arbitrator only if satisfied that they can act independently and impartially, possess the necessary competence, and have sufficient time to conduct the proceedings with appropriate diligence.<a href=\"#_ftn7\" name=\"_ftnref7\">[7]<\/a> These ethical obligations generally arise upon appointment and continue throughout the arbitral proceedings. However, certain obligations apply even before an individual accepts an appointment, while others may survive the conclusion of the proceedings. <a href=\"#_ftn8\" name=\"_ftnref8\">[8]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>Of particular relevance is the duty of disclosure established under Principle II of the GAA Code of Ethics. Arbitrators are required to disclose interests or relationships that may compromise their impartiality or create an appearance of bias. <a href=\"#_ftn9\" name=\"_ftnref9\">[9]<\/a> The obligation to disclose is explicitly set out in the GAA\u2019s Code of Ethics, according to which a person who has been asked to act as an arbitrator, before giving his\/her consent, is obliged to declare about any kind of direct or indirect, financial or personal interest that he\/she may have in relation to the outcome of the dispute. The Code specifies exactly what information an arbitrator has to disclose and how he is required to do it. Before consenting to the appointment as an arbitrator, the individual is obligated under the GAA&#8217;s Code of Ethics to examine the presence of the relations and interests indicated in the GAA&#8217;s Code of Ethics. <a href=\"#_ftn10\" name=\"_ftnref10\">[10]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>According to Article 12 (3) of Law of Georgia On Arbitration, A person to be appointed as an arbitrator, or an appointed arbitrator, from the time of his\/her appointment throughout the arbitration proceedings, is obliged to immediately notify the parties and the arbitral tribunal, about any circumstances that make his\/her impartiality and independence doubtful.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the statutory requirements, the Georgian Association of Arbitrators (GAA) has developed a professional framework for the ethical conduct of arbitrators. The GAA\u2019s Code of Ethics establishes standards for neutrality, impartiality, independence, and disclose obligations. Under the Code, an arbitrator must disclose any direct or indirect interests, relationships, or positions that could affect &#8211; or appear to affect &#8211; impartiality,\u00a0 even before accepting appointment. This framework aligns with international best practices and ensures that arbitrators act fairly and in good faith throughout the proceedings. The GAA Ethics Committee. Further enforces these standards through disciplinary measures, which may include recommendations, sanctions, or expulsion from the GAA.<a href=\"#_ftn11\" name=\"_ftnref11\">[11]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>This obligation extends to prospective arbitrators, who must disclose any direct or indirect financial or personal interests relating to the outcome of the dispute before accepting an appointment. The Code further specifies the circumstances requiring disclosure and the applicable disclosure procedure. Importantly, prospective arbitrators are required to examine whether any relevant interests or relationships exist before consenting to their appointment. Accordingly, the Code imposes not merely a passive obligation to disclose known circumstances but also an affirmative duty to undertake a reasonable assessment of potential conflicts of interest prior to accepting an appointment.<\/p>\n<p>It is worth mentioning the most recent practise in terms of duly fulfilment of the arbitrator\u2019s responsibility to disclose information. The arbitral tribunal granted the respondent\u2019s request, pursuant to which he challenged the arbitrator, as the arbitrator and the representative of the claimant both held elective positions in the management structure of a professional organisation at the same time, and the arbitrator failed to disclose this when filling out the declaration of independence and impartiality. Since the arbitrator and the claimant&#8217;s representative were both working on elective positions in the professional organization&#8217;s management structure, they would have a closer, business or personal interaction, and the arbitrator had an obligation to disclose this information. Given that the arbitrator failed to disclose this information, he was withdrawn from his position.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> Legal and Practical Aspects of Arbitration in Georgia, The Study, February 2018, Caucasus Research Resource Center Georgia, p. 5<\/p>\n<p>Official website of GAA: &lt;<a href=\"http:\/\/gaa.ge\/\">http:\/\/gaa.ge\/<\/a>&gt;<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref2\" name=\"_ftn2\">[2]<\/a> Source: &lt;<a href=\"https:\/\/eu4georgia.ge\/ka\/10-%E1%83%AC%E1%83%94%E1%83%9A%E1%83%98-%E1%83%90%E1%83%A0%E1%83%91%E1%83%98%E1%83%A2%E1%83%A0%E1%83%90%E1%83%9F%E1%83%98%E1%83%A1-%E1%83%A8%E1%83%94%E1%83%A1%E1%83%90%E1%83%AE%E1%83%94%E1%83%91\/\">https:\/\/eu4georgia.ge\/ka\/10-%E1%83%AC%E1%83%94%E1%83%9A%E1%83%98-%E1%83%90%E1%83%A0%E1%83%91%E1%83%98%E1%83%A2%E1%83%A0%E1%83%90%E1%83%9F%E1%83%98%E1%83%A1-%E1%83%A8%E1%83%94%E1%83%A1%E1%83%90%E1%83%AE%E1%83%94%E1%83%91\/<\/a>&gt;<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref3\" name=\"_ftn3\">[3]<\/a> Source: &lt;<a href=\"https:\/\/eu4georgia.ge\/leading-georgian-arbitration-institutions-commit-to-common-standards-of-ethics\/\">https:\/\/eu4georgia.ge\/leading-georgian-arbitration-institutions-commit-to-common-standards-of-ethics\/<\/a>&gt;<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref4\" name=\"_ftn4\">[4]<\/a> <em>Ibid.<\/em><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref5\" name=\"_ftn5\">[5]<\/a> <em>Ibid.<\/em><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref6\" name=\"_ftn6\">[6]<\/a> GAA\u2019s Code of Ethics (available in Georgian): &lt;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.undp.org\/ka\/georgia\/publications\/%E1%83%90%E1%83%A0%E1%83%91%E1%83%98%E1%83%A2%E1%83%A0%E1%83%97%E1%83%90-%E1%83%94%E1%83%97%E1%83%98%E1%83%99%E1%83%98%E1%83%A1-%E1%83%99%E1%83%9D%E1%83%93%E1%83%94%E1%83%A5%E1%83%A1%E1%83%98-2020\">https:\/\/www.undp.org\/ka\/georgia\/publications\/%E1%83%90%E1%83%A0%E1%83%91%E1%83%98%E1%83%A2%E1%83%A0%E1%83%97%E1%83%90-%E1%83%94%E1%83%97%E1%83%98%E1%83%99%E1%83%98%E1%83%A1-%E1%83%99%E1%83%9D%E1%83%93%E1%83%94%E1%83%A5%E1%83%A1%E1%83%98-2020<\/a>&gt;<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref7\" name=\"_ftn7\">[7]<\/a> GAA\u2019s Code of Ethics (available in Georgian): &lt;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.undp.org\/ka\/georgia\/publications\/%E1%83%90%E1%83%A0%E1%83%91%E1%83%98%E1%83%A2%E1%83%A0%E1%83%97%E1%83%90-%E1%83%94%E1%83%97%E1%83%98%E1%83%99%E1%83%98%E1%83%A1-%E1%83%99%E1%83%9D%E1%83%93%E1%83%94%E1%83%A5%E1%83%A1%E1%83%98-2020\">https:\/\/www.undp.org\/ka\/georgia\/publications\/%E1%83%90%E1%83%A0%E1%83%91%E1%83%98%E1%83%A2%E1%83%A0%E1%83%97%E1%83%90-%E1%83%94%E1%83%97%E1%83%98%E1%83%99%E1%83%98%E1%83%A1-%E1%83%99%E1%83%9D%E1%83%93%E1%83%94%E1%83%A5%E1%83%A1%E1%83%98-2020<\/a> (principle I(2))<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref8\" name=\"_ftn8\">[8]<\/a> GAA\u2019s Code of Ethics (available in Georgian): &lt;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.undp.org\/ka\/georgia\/publications\/%E1%83%90%E1%83%A0%E1%83%91%E1%83%98%E1%83%A2%E1%83%A0%E1%83%97%E1%83%90-%E1%83%94%E1%83%97%E1%83%98%E1%83%99%E1%83%98%E1%83%A1-%E1%83%99%E1%83%9D%E1%83%93%E1%83%94%E1%83%A5%E1%83%A1%E1%83%98-2020\">https:\/\/www.undp.org\/ka\/georgia\/publications\/%E1%83%90%E1%83%A0%E1%83%91%E1%83%98%E1%83%A2%E1%83%A0%E1%83%97%E1%83%90-%E1%83%94%E1%83%97%E1%83%98%E1%83%99%E1%83%98%E1%83%A1-%E1%83%99%E1%83%9D%E1%83%93%E1%83%94%E1%83%A5%E1%83%A1%E1%83%98-2020<\/a> (principle I(7))<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref9\" name=\"_ftn9\">[9]<\/a> GAA\u2019s Code of Ethics (available in Georgian): &lt;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.undp.org\/ka\/georgia\/publications\/%E1%83%90%E1%83%A0%E1%83%91%E1%83%98%E1%83%A2%E1%83%A0%E1%83%97%E1%83%90-%E1%83%94%E1%83%97%E1%83%98%E1%83%99%E1%83%98%E1%83%A1-%E1%83%99%E1%83%9D%E1%83%93%E1%83%94%E1%83%A5%E1%83%A1%E1%83%98-2020\">https:\/\/www.undp.org\/ka\/georgia\/publications\/%E1%83%90%E1%83%A0%E1%83%91%E1%83%98%E1%83%A2%E1%83%A0%E1%83%97%E1%83%90-%E1%83%94%E1%83%97%E1%83%98%E1%83%99%E1%83%98%E1%83%A1-%E1%83%99%E1%83%9D%E1%83%93%E1%83%94%E1%83%A5%E1%83%A1%E1%83%98-2020<\/a> (principle II)<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref10\" name=\"_ftn10\">[10]<\/a> <em>Ibid.<\/em><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref11\" name=\"_ftn11\">[11]<\/a> Georgian Association of Arbitrators,\u00a0<em>Arbitrators\u2019 Code of Ethics and Disciplinary Rules<\/em>\u00a0(2020, with Ethics Committee and enforcement mechanism introduced in 2018)<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are arbitrators immune from liability?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The Law of Georgia on Arbitration does not provide arbitrators with a general statutory immunity from civil liability. Liability may, however, be limited by the applicable institutional rules or by the terms governing the arbitrator\u2019s appointment, subject to mandatory rules of Georgian law. There appears to be no developed body of reported Georgian case law establishing a general doctrine of arbitral immunity comparable to that recognised in some jurisdictions..<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>Before the amendments to the Criminal Code of Georgia, members of the tribunal were subject to criminal liability for abuse of official powers.<a href=\"#_ftn2\" name=\"_ftnref2\">[2]<\/a> However, this liability is no longer envisaged in Georgian legislation.<\/p>\n<p>In practice, arbitrators are considered immune from liability for acts performed in good faith within the scope of their mandate. This is consistent with international arbitration practice. The Law of Georgia on Arbitration implicitly supports this principle, and the Georgian Association of Arbitrator\u2019s (GAA) Code of Ethics reinforces the requirements that arbitrators act in good faith, impartially, and independently..<a href=\"#_ftn3\" name=\"_ftnref3\">[3]<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> Group of Authors, Sophie Tkemaladze (Scientific Editor), Arbitration Guide for the First Instance Courts, Arbitration Initiative Georgia, EU4Justice, UNDP Georgia (2017), p.111<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref2\" name=\"_ftn2\">[2]<\/a> Article 332 of Criminal Code of Georgia (1999, amended 2019)<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref3\" name=\"_ftn3\">[3]<\/a> Georgian Association of Arbitrators (GAA), Code of Ethics (2014); UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration (1985, with 2006 amendments)<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Is the principle of competence-competence recognized in your country?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Yes, it is. Georgian law expressly recognizes the competence-competence principle, empowering arbitral tribunals to determine their own jurisdiction, including questions concerning the existence and validity of an arbitration agreement.<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>This principle, known as competence-competence, allows the tribunal to rule on its own jurisdiction even if the validity of the arbitration agreement is challenged before the courts. Georgian courts generally respect the tribunal\u2019s determination and will not intervene unless there is a clear violation of law, procedural rules, or public policy. The recognition of competence-competence aligns Georgia with international standards such as the UNCITRAL Model Law, reinforcing the autonomy and authority of the arbitral tribunal in jurisdictional matters.<a href=\"#_ftn2\" name=\"_ftnref2\">[2]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>According to the\u00a0Tbilisi Court of Appeal, Civil Chamber, ruling of 10 July 2024 on declaring an arbitration as incompetent, arbitration may be defined as a specific dispute resolution mechanism established under a contract between two or more parties, whereby the parties agree that the decision rendered by the arbitrators will be final. Such a decision must be rendered through a fair and equal process and is enforceable.<\/p>\n<p>The Court emphasized that while arbitration is guided by general principles &#8211; such as procedural flexibility, speed of dispute resolution, party autonomy, confidentiality, and trust in arbitrators\u2019 independence and qualifications &#8211; the arbitral institution is ultimately a service for the parties rather than a judicial authority. Consequently, any circumstance creating a justified doubt regarding the objectivity or impartiality of the arbitral process must be carefully considered to maintain confidence in the proceedings.<\/p>\n<p>In this case, the Court found that the applicant had a justified concern regarding impartiality because the respondent\u2019s representative had a clear and significant business connection with the arbitral institution designated to hear the dispute. This created a reasonable risk that the arbitration process could not objectively resolve the matter. Therefore, the Court held that the arbitration agreement, as applied in this instance, was contrary to principles of fairness and equity, and the arbitral tribunal lacked competence over this dispute.<\/p>\n<p>This ruling illustrates that while parties may agree to arbitration, the courts retain the authority to intervene if there is a real risk that the arbitral process cannot be conducted impartially. Such considerations provide a natural introduction to the\u00a0competence-competence principle, which allows the arbitral tribunal to rule on its own jurisdiction, but as we will see, this principle is recognized in Georgia with certain limitations.<a href=\"#_ftn3\" name=\"_ftnref3\">[3]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>According to the\u00a0Tbilisi Court of Appeal, Civil Chamber, ruling of 11 May 2023 on declaring a private arbitration as incompetent, when the arbitration agreement itself is disputed between the parties, a party may challenge the competence of the arbitral tribunal in accordance with Article 16 of the Law of Georgia on Arbitration. Specifically, the party must raise the objection before the arbitral tribunal, which is then required to deliberate and render a decision on the matter; that decision may subsequently be appealed before the court. In essence, this rule establishes the procedure for determining jurisdiction.<\/p>\n<p>In this case, the applicant did not contest the validity of the arbitration agreement itself but rather questioned the impartiality of the arbitral proceedings, noting that the respondent simultaneously served as a representative of the opposing party in the dispute and as an arbitrator at the arbitral institution designated to hear the case. Even if the respondent would not personally decide the matter, the ability to reach an objective decision in the dispute could still be undermined. Therefore, the applicant challenged not the validity of the arbitration agreement, but the objectivity of the arbitral process.<\/p>\n<p>The Court emphasized that independence and impartiality require not only that the dispute actually be considered independently and impartially, but also that such perception exist &#8211; particularly in the eyes of the parties and the public &#8211; that the arbitrator is conducting the proceedings independently and impartially.<a href=\"#_ftn4\" name=\"_ftnref4\">[4]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>There are numerous court rulings regarding the principle of competence-competence. While this principle is recognized in Georgia, it is not absolute, and parties may agree to resolve disputes through arbitration. In line with this, the Civil Chamber of Tbilisi Court of Appeal, Ruling of 4 September 2023, explained that even though an arbitration agreement provided for the dispute to be resolved by a permanent tribunal, a potential conflict of interest emerged after the proceedings began. This created a reasonable doubt that the arbitrator\u2019s decision could be influenced, and the challenge to the tribunal\u2019s competence was therefore justified. The court further emphasized that declaring the arbitration incompetent does not restrict the parties\u2019 right to a fair hearing, which may instead be realized through judicial proceedings.<a href=\"#_ftn5\" name=\"_ftnref5\">[5]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>Thus, as this ruling demonstrates, the principle of competence-competence is recognized in Georgia, but its application can be limited in practice.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> Law of Georgia on Arbitration, Article 16(1)<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref2\" name=\"_ftn2\">[2]<\/a> Law of Georgia on Arbitration, Article 16; UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration, 1985; International Bar Association, Georgia: Country Guide on Arbitration.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref3\" name=\"_ftn3\">[3]<\/a> Tbilisi Court of Appeal, Civil Chamber, ruling of 10 July 2024 on declaring an arbitration as incompetent<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref4\" name=\"_ftn4\">[4]<\/a> Tbilisi Court of Appeal, Civil Chamber, ruling of 11 May 2023 on declaring a private arbitration as incompetent<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref5\" name=\"_ftn5\">[5]<\/a> Tbilisi Court of Appeal, Civil Chamber, Ruling of 4 September 2023<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What is the approach of local courts towards a party commencing litigation in apparent breach of an arbitration agreement?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Georgian courts have consistently enforced the principle that disputes covered by a valid arbitration agreement must be referred to arbitration. In practice, courts generally do not examine the merits of the dispute at the initial stage, focusing solely on the existence, validity, and applicability of the arbitration agreement. This approach upholds party autonomy and reinforces the authority of arbitration agreements, preventing parties from bypassing arbitration by initiating parallel court proceedings.<\/p>\n<p>For example, Article 9(1) of the Law of Georgia on Arbitration provides that a court before which an action is brought in a matter subject to an arbitration agreement, upon request of a party before the expiry of the time to submit a statement of defence, must terminate the proceedings and refer the parties to arbitration, unless it finds the agreement void, invalid, or incapable of being performed.<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>\u201cThe agreement of the parties on the transfer of the dispute to arbitration, signed in compliance with the requirements of the law, has legal force, which obliges the parties to the agreement to submit the claim to the arbitration for consideration on the essential issue of the dispute, which is the subject of the arbitration agreement. If there is an agreement to submit the dispute to arbitration, the court is not authorized to consider the claim on the dispute that is the subject of the arbitration agreement, and if one of the parties still applies to the court with a claim, then the court is obliged to stop the proceedings\u201d.<a href=\"#_ftn2\" name=\"_ftnref2\">[2]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>The above approach is further reinforced by the ruling of the Tbilisi City Court, Civil Chamber, dated 2 May 2025 on refusal to secure a claim. The court emphasized that under Article 16(1) of the Law of Georgia on Arbitration, the arbitral tribunal is competent to determine its own jurisdiction, including the existence and validity of an arbitration agreement. The court also noted that, pursuant to Article 16(5), judicial review of arbitral jurisdiction does not prevent the arbitral proceedings from commencing, continuing, or resulting in an award. The court clarified that any decision on jurisdiction will later affect the recognition and enforcement of the arbitral award, but does not block the arbitration process itself.<a href=\"#_ftn3\" name=\"_ftnref3\">[3]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>This confirms that Georgian courts respect the principle that arbitration clauses are binding, and even when litigation is commenced in apparent breach of an arbitration agreement, courts will usually refer the parties to arbitration while ensuring that judicial oversight remains available regarding the tribunal\u2019s competence and the enforceability of any award.<\/p>\n<p>Such practice aligns Georgia with international standards, such as the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration, where courts generally defer to arbitration when a valid agreement exists.<a href=\"#_ftn4\" name=\"_ftnref4\">[4]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>Local courts in Georgia consistently prioritize the enforcement of arbitration agreements, ensuring that disputes covered by such agreements are resolved through arbitration rather than through parallel court proceedings.<\/p>\n<p>This approach is reinforced by the ruling of the Batumi City Court, Civil Chamber, dated 23 December 2024 regarding an amended claim. The court emphasized that under Article 9(1) of the Law of Georgia on Arbitration, a court before which an action is brought concerning a matter that is the subject of an arbitration agreement is obliged, upon a timely request by a party, to terminate the proceedings and refer the parties to arbitration, unless it finds that the agreement is void, invalid, or incapable of being performed.<\/p>\n<p>The court also noted that, once a claim is accepted into court proceedings, the dispute cannot be heard by any other court or authority, and the parties are prohibited from transferring, selling, or otherwise disposing of the subject of the dispute or abandoning their claims.<a href=\"#_ftn5\" name=\"_ftnref5\">[5]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>It illustrates that Georgian courts respect both the primacy of arbitration agreements and the parties\u2019 contractual autonomy, while also ensuring that judicial oversight safeguards the enforceability of arbitration.<\/p>\n<p>According to the Tbilisi City Court, Civil Chamber, ruling dated 13 March 2025 on termination of proceedings, under Article 12 of the Civil Procedure Code of Georgia, a private dispute based on equality of the parties, which can be resolved between them by agreement, may be submitted to arbitration by agreement of the parties. Pursuant to Article 8 of the Law of Georgia on Arbitration, \u201can arbitration agreement is an agreement by which the parties agree to submit to arbitration all or some disputes arising from or related to a particular contractual or other legal relationship between them. The arbitration agreement may be included in a contract as an arbitration clause or may be concluded as a separate agreement. An arbitration agreement is considered to be in writing if its content is recorded in any form, regardless of the form of the arbitration agreement or contract.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Based on these provisions, a dispute arising from a private relationship founded on equality of the parties may be referred to the arbitration agreed upon by the parties in the arbitration agreement. The agreement must specify the particular arbitral institution authorized to hear and resolve the dispute. An arbitration agreement is void if the designated arbitral institution is not clearly identified or if it cannot be determined from the content of the agreement which specific arbitration the parties intended.<\/p>\n<p>Under Article 9(1) of the Law of Georgia on Arbitration, a court where a claim has been filed on a matter that is the subject of an arbitration agreement is obliged, upon a party\u2019s request made before the expiration of the time for submitting a statement of defense, to terminate the proceedings and refer the parties to arbitration, unless the court finds that the arbitration agreement is void, invalid, or incapable of being performed.<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, Article 272<sup>1<\/sup> of the Civil Procedure Code provides that if the parties have concluded a contract or reached an agreement to submit a dispute to arbitration, the court shall terminate the proceedings upon a party\u2019s request, which must be made before the expiration of the time for submitting a statement of defense. This provision establishes that, where an agreement between the parties provides for arbitration, the court must terminate the proceedings on the basis of a request made in a timely manner.<a href=\"#_ftn6\" name=\"_ftnref6\">[6]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>Tbilisi Court of Appeal clarified that under Article 272\u00b9 of the Civil Procedure Code, a court must terminate proceedings upon a party\u2019s request if the parties have a contract or agreement to submit their dispute to arbitration. Under Article 12 of the Code, a private property dispute based on equality of the parties may be submitted to arbitration by agreement.<\/p>\n<p>According to Article 8 of the Law of Georgia on Arbitration, an arbitration agreement is an agreement whereby the parties consent to submit all or some disputes arising from their contractual or other legal relations to arbitration. Such an agreement may be included in a contract or made separately, and it is considered in writing if its content is recorded in any form.<\/p>\n<p>Article 9(1) of the Law of Georgia on Arbitration provides that if a claim is brought in court concerning a dispute covered by an arbitration agreement, the court must, upon a party\u2019s request (made before the expiration of the period for submitting a statement of defense), terminate proceedings and refer the parties to arbitration, unless the court finds the agreement invalid, void, or incapable of being performed.<\/p>\n<p>The court emphasized that the arbitration agreement reflects the genuine will of the parties, specifying which arbitral tribunal is competent. For an arbitration agreement to be valid, it must clearly identify the tribunal and include the minimum essential elements necessary to qualify as an arbitration agreement. If such clarity does not exist, the tribunal is not competent to consider the dispute.<\/p>\n<p>In summary, the court confirmed that an arbitration agreement is a private-law agreement determining the procedure for resolving disputes. Its content must clearly reflect the parties\u2019 intention to submit disputes arising from their legal relationship to arbitration rather than to ordinary courts.<a href=\"#_ftn7\" name=\"_ftnref7\">[7]<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> Law of Georgia on Arbitration, Article 9(1)<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref2\" name=\"_ftn2\">[2]<\/a> The Supreme Court of Georgia, Case \u2116 \u10d0\u10e1-148-140-2017, January 18, 2018<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref3\" name=\"_ftn3\">[3]<\/a> Tbilisi City Court, Civil Chamber, Ruling dated 2 May 2025 on refusal to secure a claim<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref4\" name=\"_ftn4\">[4]<\/a> UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration, 1985<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref5\" name=\"_ftn5\">[5]<\/a> Batumi City Court, Civil Chamber, Ruling dated 23 December 2024<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref6\" name=\"_ftn6\">[6]<\/a> Tbilisi City Court, Civil Chamber, ruling dated 13 March 2025 on termination of proceedings<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref7\" name=\"_ftn7\">[7]<\/a> Tbilisi Court of Appeal, Civil Chamber, Ruling of 12 November 2024<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What happens when a respondent fails to participate in the arbitration? Can the local courts compel participation?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>In accordance with Article 30 (5) of the Law of Georgia on Arbitration, if respondent fails to file the statement of defense, proceedings shall nevertheless be continued. Arbitral tribunal in such an instance renders the award on the basis of a claim and pieces of relevant evidence presented by the claimant. Therefore, local courts can not compel participation.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Can third parties voluntarily join arbitration proceedings? If all parties agree to the intervention, is the tribunal bound by this agreement? If all parties do not agree to the intervention, can the tribunal allow for it?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The Georgian Law on Arbitration does not expressly regulate the joinder or intervention of third parties in arbitration proceedings. Accordingly, the possibility of third-party participation primarily depends on the parties\u2019 agreement and, where applicable, the rules of the arbitral institution administering the proceedings.<\/p>\n<p>If all parties agree to the participation of a third party, the tribunal will generally give effect to such agreement. However, in the absence of unanimous consent, there is no statutory authority under Georgian law for the tribunal to impose third-party participation unilaterally. Whether joinder without full consent is possible will therefore depend on the relevant institutional rules (if any) governing the arbitration.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What interim measures are available? Will local courts issue interim measures pending the constitution of the tribunal? Are anti-suit and\/or anti-arbitration injunctions available and enforceable in your country? What is the approach of local courts in your jurisdiction to anti-arbitration injunctions issued in breach of arbitration agreements?  Have there been any recent decisions on this point?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Arbitral tribunals may order interim measures to preserve the status quo, prevent harm, safeguard assets for enforcement, and protect relevant evidence. Courts may also grant assistance in relation to interim relief.<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>In addition to that, interesting observations can be made based on Georgian arbitration and court practice. There are certain instances when the arbitral tribunal goes beyond the listed scope and issues the type of interim measure that is not included in the Law of Georgia on Arbitration and is only envisaged in Georgian Civil Code of Procedure (governing securing of the claims, exclusively, during the court proceedings, Articles 191 &#8211; 199<sup>1<\/sup>), such as attachment of the property. Despite that, Appellate Court of Georgia still recognizes and enforces such an award.<a href=\"#_ftn2\" name=\"_ftnref2\">[2]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>In accordance with Article 23 (1) of the Law of Georgia on Arbitration, an arbitration party may apply to a court requesting granting interim measures, which can also be arranged before the constitution of the tribunal. Since 2015 amendments to the Law of Georgia on Arbitration, court has been given discretion to use the interim measure even before filing the arbitration claim.<a href=\"#_ftn3\" name=\"_ftnref3\">[3]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>Under Georgian law, both arbitral tribunals and local courts are empowered to grant interim measures. In practice, local courts play a particularly significant role in safeguarding the effectiveness of arbitration by issuing interim relief, including before the constitution of the tribunal. A recent decision of the Tbilisi Court of Appeal<a href=\"#_ftn4\" name=\"_ftnref4\">[4]<\/a> illustrates this approach. The court upheld a motion for interim relief prior to the commencement of arbitral proceedings, prohibiting a bank from paying out under a USD 100,000 guarantee issued in favor of the claimant.<\/p>\n<p>Georgian law provides parties with the possibility to request interim measures before local courts, including prior to the constitution of the arbitral tribunal. However, courts exercise this power cautiously to avoid undermining the autonomy of arbitration. In a recent ruling of the Tbilisi City Court<a href=\"#_ftn5\" name=\"_ftnref5\">[5]<\/a>, the claimant sought interim relief in the form of suspension of ongoing arbitral proceedings before the Tbilisi Arbitration Institute. The court rejected the request, reasoning that interim measures must serve the purpose of ensuring the enforceability of a future judgment, and may not be used to halt arbitral proceedings. The court emphasized that such measures must strike a fair balance between the claimant\u2019s right to secure potential enforcement and the respondent\u2019s right not to be disproportionately restricted.<\/p>\n<p>In another case,<a href=\"#_ftn6\" name=\"_ftnref6\">[6]<\/a> the court granted interim relief prohibiting the respondent bank from proceeding with the selling of mortgaged property pending the outcome of litigation. The court emphasized that interim measures serve to prevent irreparable harm and to ensure that a claimant\u2019s rights remain enforceable at the conclusion of the proceedings. This decision demonstrates that Georgian courts are prepared to adopt interim measures such as freezing orders, prohibitions on enforcement actions, and restrictions on the disposal of property.<\/p>\n<p>Georgian legislation is not familiar with anti-suit\/anti-arbitration injunction.<a href=\"#_ftn7\" name=\"_ftnref7\">[7]<\/a> However, in accordance with legal doctrine, in case if arbitrators broadly interpret the scope of the interim measures stipulated under the Georgian Law in parallel with international standards, the latter has the potential to acquire viability in Georgian practice.<a href=\"#_ftn8\" name=\"_ftnref8\">[8]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>As had been said, Georgian legislation does not expressly regulate anti-arbitration injunctions issued by local courts to restrain arbitral proceedings in breach of an arbitration agreement. The Law of Georgia on Arbitration establishes the independence of arbitration and provides that court intervention in legal relations governed by the Law is impermissible except where expressly provided by law.<a href=\"#_ftn9\" name=\"_ftnref9\">[9]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>The Law nevertheless grants Georgian courts specific powers to issue interim measures in support of arbitration, including before the constitution of the arbitral tribunal.<a href=\"#_ftn10\" name=\"_ftnref10\">[10]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>However, these statutory powers do not expressly include an anti-arbitration injunction aimed at preventing or terminating arbitral proceedings. In addition, there is currently no identified Georgian court decision specifically addressing the issuance or enforcement of an anti-arbitration injunction in breach of an arbitration agreement. Arbitrators are generally empowered to rule on their own jurisdiction and may issue interim measures or injunctions to prevent parties from commencing or continuing litigation proceedings in contravention of an arbitration agreement. The enforceability of such injunctions may depend on the willingness of local courts to uphold the principle of competence-competence and the specific circumstances of the case. As of today, there is no court practice regarding this matter.<a href=\"#_ftn11\" name=\"_ftnref11\">[11]<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> Law of Georgia on Arbitration, Articles 17(2) and 23.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref2\" name=\"_ftn2\">[2]<\/a> Tbilisi Court of Appeals, Case No N2\u10d1 \/ 1889-15, May 15, 2015; <em>Machaidze<\/em><em>,<\/em><em> O<\/em><em>tar<\/em>, Conditions of Application, Recognition and Enforcement of Interim Measures in Arbitral Proceedings, 2020, \u00a0p. 97, is available at: &lt;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.jtconsulting-geo.com\/uploads\/files\/publications\/8\/ghonisdziebebis-gamoyenebis-da-tsnoba-aghsrulebis-pirobebi.pdf\">https:\/\/www.jtconsulting-geo.com\/uploads\/files\/publications\/8\/ghonisdziebebis-gamoyenebis-da-tsnoba-aghsrulebis-pirobebi.pdf<\/a>&gt;<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref3\" name=\"_ftn3\">[3]<\/a> Explanatory Note, draft amendments to 2015 The Law of Georgia on Arbitration; <em>Machaidze Otar<\/em>, Conditions of Application, Recognition and Enforcement of Interim Measures in Arbitral Proceedings, 2020, p.60<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref4\" name=\"_ftn4\">[4]<\/a> Tbilisi Court of Appeals, Case No2\u10d1\/5788-23; December 08, 2023<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref5\" name=\"_ftn5\">[5]<\/a> Tbilisi City Court, Case No2\/9775-25; May 02, 2025<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref6\" name=\"_ftn6\">[6]<\/a>\u00a0 Batumi City Court, Case No2\/3817-24; December 23, 2024<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref7\" name=\"_ftn7\">[7]<\/a> <em>Machaidze Otar<\/em>, Conditions of Application, Recognition and Enforcement of Interim Measures in Arbitral Proceedings, 2020,p.107<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref8\" name=\"_ftn8\">[8]<\/a> <em>Ibid.<\/em><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref9\" name=\"_ftn9\">[9]<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.matsne.gov.ge\/en\/document\/view\/89284?publication=8\">The Law of Georgia on Arbitration, Article 6(2)<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref10\" name=\"_ftn10\">[10]<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.matsne.gov.ge\/en\/document\/view\/89284?publication=8\">The Law of Georgia on Arbitration, Article 23<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref11\" name=\"_ftn11\">[11]<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.ibanet.org\/document?id=Georgia-country-guide-arbitration&amp;utm_source=chatgpt.com\">International Bar Association, Arbitration Guide<\/a> &#8211; Georgia, p. 10.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are there particular rules governing evidentiary matters in arbitration? Will the local courts in your jurisdiction play any role in the obtaining of evidence? Can local courts compel witnesses to participate in arbitration proceedings?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Georgian law does not provide for specific set of rules governing evidentiary matters in arbitration.<\/p>\n<p>Georgian courts may assist in taking evidence at the request of the arbitral tribunal or a party acting with the tribunal&#8217;s consent.<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>Local courts can compel participation of witnesses. Despite the fact that assistance in witness attendance is not specifically mentioned in Article 35 of the Law of Georgia on Arbitration, this provision is interpreted broadly, including <em>inter alia<\/em> the court\u2019s assistance in obtaining the witness statement, as the latter is one of the pieces of evidence. The only difference is that while assistance in obtaining the evidence may be granted both upon parties\u2019 or tribunal\u2019s request, witness attendance may only be arranged upon the tribunal\u2019s request<em>.<\/em><a href=\"#_ftn2\" name=\"_ftnref2\">[2]<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> Law of Georgia on Arbitration, Article 35(3)<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref2\" name=\"_ftn2\">[2]<\/a> <em>Ibid<\/em>., pp.130-131<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What ethical codes and other professional standards, if any, apply to counsel and arbitrators conducting proceedings in your country? Do these codes and professional standards apply only to counsel and arbitrators having the nationality of your jurisdiction?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Arbitrators\u2019 Code of Ethics apply to arbitrators\u2019 conduct designed by Georgian Association of Arbitrators in 2013 (amended later in 2018 as a result of introducing the enforcement mechanism), application of the rules of which is expanded to four leading arbitration institutions throughout the country together with the members of the Association.<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a> The Arbitrators\u2019 Code of Ethics, adopted by the Georgian Association of Arbitrators (2013, amended 2018), applies to all arbitrators sitting in Georgian-seated proceedings under the auspices of the Association and the main arbitral institutions that have endorsed it, irrespective of nationality. Accordingly, foreign arbitrators appointed in such proceedings are also expected to comply.<\/p>\n<p>As for the counsels\u2019 conduct both in court and arbitration proceedings, Code of Ethics for lawyers introduced by the Georgian Bar Association is applicable. With respect to counsel, the Code of Ethics of the Georgian Bar Association governs the professional conduct of lawyers admitted to the Georgian Bar. This code formally applies only to members of the Georgian Bar Association. Foreign-qualified lawyers who are not admitted in Georgia are not directly subject to it, although arbitral tribunals seated in Georgia may expect all counsel to adhere to general standards of fairness and integrity, and institutional rules may contain their own provisions regulating party representatives.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> Further information is available at: &lt;<a href=\"https:\/\/eu4georgia.ge\/leading-georgian-arbitration-institutions-commit-to-common-standards-of-ethics\/\">https:\/\/eu4georgia.ge\/leading-georgian-arbitration-institutions-commit-to-common-standards-of-ethics\/<\/a>&gt;<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">In your country, are there any rules with respect to the confidentiality of arbitration proceedings?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Yes. Georgian law expressly recognizes the confidentiality of arbitration proceedings. Article 32(4) of the Law of Georgia on Arbitration establishes that, unless otherwise provided by law or agreed by the parties, arbitration proceedings must be conducted in private. It further prohibits the publication of documents, evidence, and written or oral statements submitted or made during the proceedings, as well as their disclosure or use in other judicial or administrative proceedings. Furthermore, Article 32(5) imposes an express duty of confidentiality on arbitrators and all persons participating in the arbitration proceedings, requiring them to preserve the confidentiality of information obtained in the course of such proceedings. Accordingly, confidentiality constitutes the default statutory rule under Georgian arbitration law, subject to exceptions established by law or agreement of the parties.<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>However, after 2015 amendments to Law of Georgia on Arbitration, Article 27 defines that \u201cUnless otherwise determined by this Law or by the agreement of the parties, written notices shall be served upon the parties in accordance with the provisions for court notices and summons provided for by the Civil Procedure Code of Georgia\u201d. This provision may give rise to inconsistent practice, taking into consideration the fact that even the information regarding the arbitral process should remain confidential according to the established international arbitral practice. This principle may be neglected by the reference to the Civil Code of Procedure, which enables the court notices and summons to be issued publicly. This regulation is neither in line with the rules provided for by the leading international institutional rules nor the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules. Hence, the confidentiality nature of arbitral proceedings may be jeopardized.<a href=\"#_ftn2\" name=\"_ftnref2\">[2]<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> Code of Ethics of Arbitrators, Principle II (9)<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref2\" name=\"_ftn2\">[2]<\/a> <em>Titberidze<\/em><em>,<\/em> <em>Giorgi<\/em>, The Law of Georgia on Arbitration, Commentary, Second Edition, Tbilisi 2020, pp.142-144<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">How are the IBA guidelines on conflicts of interest and other similar soft law sources viewed by courts and tribunals in your jurisdiction? Are they frequently applied? Have any developments under the 2024 IBA Guidelines, including the expanded Orange List, the treatment of social media conduct, or due diligence obligations on parties, and the UNCITRAL Code of Conduct for Arbitrators been addressed by courts and tribunals in your jurisdiction?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>In practice, the IBA Guidelines on Conflicts of Interest and other similar soft law instruments are generally regarded as persuasive rather than binding in our jurisdiction. Courts and arbitral tribunals may refer to them as guidance when assessing issues of impartiality, independence, or procedural conduct, but they are not applied as mandatory rules. Their use is more common in complex or cross-border matters, where parties and tribunals rely on internationally accepted standards to support consistency and transparency in arbitral proceedings.<\/p>\n<p>The Georgian Explanatory Dictionary of Arbitration defines conflict of interest as circumstances that may raise reasonable doubts about the arbitrator\u2019s impartiality and independence, directly referencing the IBA Guidelines.<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a> There are no specific statutory provisions governing conflicts of interest among arbitrators. The applicability of such rules is contingent on the parties\u2019 agreement. In some cases, the parties may choose to rely on the IBA Guidelines, which are occasionally adopted by the parties and, consequently, serve as a reference for arbitrators. <a href=\"#_ftn2\" name=\"_ftnref2\">[2]<\/a> Parties rarely agree on application of the IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration. Accordingly, arbitral tribunals exercise discretion and have the powers provided under the party agreement and the arbitration rules (in case of an institutional arbitration), or the general discretion provided under the Georgian Law on Arbitration (in case of ad hoc arbitration)<a href=\"#_ftn3\" name=\"_ftnref3\"><sup>[3]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n<p>A concrete example is a ruling of the Supreme Court of Georgia which, at the stage of recognition and enforcement of a foreign arbitral award, examined an objection that the arbitrator lacked independence and impartiality and expressly referred to the IBA Guidelines on Conflicts of Interest, including the justifiable-doubts standard and the Red, Orange and Green Lists. The Court held that the mere inclusion of a party\u2019s partner on the arbitral institution\u2019s list of arbitrators did not, without more, give rise to justifiable doubts as to the arbitrator\u2019s impartiality, and it granted recognition and enforcement.<a href=\"#_ftn4\" name=\"_ftnref4\">[4]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>As for the 2024 revision of the IBA Guidelines, its principal changes have not yet been the subject of any reported decision of a Georgian court or of any publicly available award of a Georgian arbitral institution. The same holds for the UNCITRAL Code of Conduct for Arbitrators in International Investment Dispute Resolution, which is in any event directed at investor-State arbitration and has no reported application in Georgian practice so far.<a href=\"#_ftn5\" name=\"_ftnref5\">[5]<\/a><a href=\"#_ftn6\" name=\"_ftnref6\">[6]<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> Injia B., Lapiashvili N., \u201cExplanatory Dictionary of Arbitration,\u201d(Georgia, Zviad Kordzadze Publishing, 2016) p.24.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref2\" name=\"_ftn2\">[2]<\/a> IBA ARBITRATION COMMITTEE, Arbitration Guide GEORGIA, p. 8, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.ibanet.org\/document?id=Georgia-country-guide-arbitration\">https:\/\/www.ibanet.org\/document?id=Georgia-country-guide-arbitration<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref3\" name=\"_ftn3\">[3]<\/a> IBA ARBITRATION COMMITTEE, Arbitration Guide GEORGIA, p. 11, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.ibanet.org\/document?id=Georgia-country-guide-arbitration\">https:\/\/www.ibanet.org\/document?id=Georgia-country-guide-arbitration<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref4\" name=\"_ftn4\">[4]<\/a> Supreme Court of Georgia, Chamber of Civil Cases, Ruling in case No. \u10d0-3947-\u10e8-93-2020, 2 March 2021, on the recognition and enforcement of the decision of 14 September 2020 (No. I 3215-20) of the Russian Arbitration Centre at the Institute of Modern Arbitration; the Court expressly referred to the IBA Guidelines on Conflicts of Interest in International Arbitration (International Bar Association, 2014).<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref5\" name=\"_ftn5\">[5]<\/a> IBA Guidelines on Conflicts of Interest in International Arbitration, as revised and adopted by the IBA in February 2024, including the expanded Orange List and General Standards 3, 4 and 6. Available at: https:\/\/www.ibanet.org.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref6\" name=\"_ftn6\">[6]<\/a> UNCITRAL Code of Conduct for Arbitrators in International Investment Dispute Resolution, adopted in 2023 and published in 2024. Available at: https:\/\/uncitral.un.org\/en\/codeofconduct.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">How are the costs of arbitration proceedings estimated and allocated? Can pre- and post-award interest be included in the principal claim and costs incurred?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>There are different approaches to the cost estimation. Whilst some institutional rules determine the costs of administrative nature and honorarium of arbitrators separately, others provide for the total amount for the aforementioned costs.<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>Rules of leading arbitral institutions on cost allocation are somewhat similar, therefore, following generalized tendency can be formed &#8211; costs are fixed within the final award, which contains the proportion on the basis of which party\u2019s participation is determined. Allocation of costs is being made taking into consideration all the circumstances which are deemed to be relevant upon tribunal\u2019s discretion.<a href=\"#_ftn2\" name=\"_ftnref2\">[2]<\/a> However, allocation of costs is generally dependent on the outcome of the case in practice.<\/p>\n<p>As mentioned, allocation of costs is generally dependent on the outcome of the case in practice. However, there are several awards to be noted regarding allocation of costs. In one of the arbitral awards rendered in 2022, although the arbitration claim was partially satisfied and at the same time the counterclaim of the respondents was also partially satisfied, the arbitration costs were still entirely borne by the respondent and there was no distribution of the arbitration costs. In another arbitral award rendered in 2023 although the claims of the claimant were not satisfied at all and on the other hand counterclaim submitted by the respondents was fully satisfied, the arbitration award fully established that the costs incurred by the parties are not subject to allocation.<\/p>\n<p>Payment of interest as a claim is governed by the substantive law in Georgia. However, there is no distinction being made regarding pre \u2013 and post \u2013 award interest.<\/p>\n<p>Under Article 403 Civil Code of Georgia, interest is due and payable throughout the whole period of delay of payment of funds, given that the interest was pre \u2013 determined by the parties upon the agreement.<\/p>\n<p>Post \u2013 award interest, although not directly envisaged under the Georgian legislation, might still find its expression during the course of proceedings, when competent authority may grant the disputing party\u2019s request to order the opponent the payment of interest until the enforcement of the decision rendered.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> Georgian International Arbitration Centre (GIAC) Arbitration Rules, Annex I Schedule of fees; EBA Mediation and Arbitration Centre (EBA MAC) Arbitration Rules, Appendix I of the Arbitration Rules of EBA Mediation and Arbitration Centre LLC<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref2\" name=\"_ftn2\">[2]<\/a> Georgian International Arbitration Centre (GIAC) Arbitration Rules, Articles 42-43; EBA Mediation and Arbitration Centre (EBA MAC) Arbitration Rules, Article 48<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">How are applications for security for costs viewed in your jurisdiction?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Under Georgian law, neither the Arbitration Act nor the Civil Procedure Code expressly provide for the possibility of ordering security for costs. In other words, the existing framework does not currently recognize cost-protection measures as part of interim relief available to arbitral tribunals or courts.<\/p>\n<p>By contrast, international arbitration practice has increasingly embraced security for costs, largely in response to the reality that arbitral proceedings typically involve significantly higher costs than local litigation. This trend reflects a broader concern with safeguarding respondents against the risk of uncollectible cost awards, particularly where claimants may be impecunious or where enforcement prospects are uncertain.<\/p>\n<p>If Georgia aims to strengthen its position as a regional hub for international dispute resolution, it will be important for its legal framework to evolve in line with international standards. This could involve developing an interpretation of the existing legislation\u2014guided by comparative practice\u2014that would empower arbitral tribunals and courts to grant security for costs where appropriate. Doing so would not only increase the attractiveness of Georgia as a seat of arbitration but also reinforce confidence among foreign investors and parties in the fairness and balance of the arbitral process.<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> <em>Machaidze<\/em><em>, Otar<\/em>, Conditions of Application, Recognition and Enforcement of Interim Measures in Arbitral Proceedings, 2020, Tbilisi, p.146, is available at: &lt;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.jtconsulting-geo.com\/uploads\/files\/publications\/8\/ghonisdziebebis-gamoyenebis-da-tsnoba-aghsrulebis-pirobebi.pdf\">https:\/\/www.jtconsulting-geo.com\/uploads\/files\/publications\/8\/ghonisdziebebis-gamoyenebis-da-tsnoba-aghsrulebis-pirobebi.pdf<\/a>&gt;<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What legal requirements are there in your country for the recognition and enforcement of an award? Is there a requirement that the award be reasoned, i.e. substantiated and motivated?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Under Georgian law, arbitral awards must be in writing, signed by the arbitrator or the required majority of arbitrators, and identify the parties, arbitrators, date and place of the award. Awards must generally contain reasons unless the parties have agreed otherwise or the award records a settlement.<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a> As for the following provision, The arbitration award must contain the tribunal\u2019s reasoning, stating the reasons based on which the arbitration award was rendered by the arbitral tribunal, unless the parties have agreed on not to have the basis of the decision stated or the arbitration award is rendered in accordance with Article 38 of this Law.<a href=\"#_ftn2\" name=\"_ftnref2\">[2]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>Under Article 44 (1) of Law of Georgia on Arbitration recognition and enforcement of an award becomes binding upon bringing a written motion to the court. Whilst in case of awards rendered in the territory of Georgia courts of appeal are competent, awards issued outside Georgian territory are subject to the competence of the Supreme Court of Georgia.<\/p>\n<p>As for the judicial standard of review of the award, the same pattern embodied in UNCITRAL Model Law is incorporated in procedural legislation &#8211; no judicial review of arbitration awards on the merits. However, court practice is not quite complementary with this standard. There are certain instances when courts review the award on the merits during the setting aside or recognition and enforcement stage on their own initiative relying on the argumentation that the award is contradictory to the domestic public policy.<a href=\"#_ftn3\" name=\"_ftnref3\">[3]<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> Law of Georgia on Arbitration, Article 39(2)<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref2\" name=\"_ftn2\">[2]<\/a> Article 39 (3) of The Law of Georgia on Arbitration<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref3\" name=\"_ftn3\">[3]<\/a><em>\u00a0 Titberidze<\/em><em>,<\/em><em> G<\/em><em>iorgi<\/em>, The Law of Georgia on Arbitration, Commentary, Second Edition, Tbilisi 2020, pp.42-43<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What is the estimated timeframe for the recognition and enforcement of an award (domestic and international)? Can a party bring a motion for the recognition and enforcement of an award on an ex parte basis? Would the standard of review be different for domestic and international awards?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Under Article 356<sup>21<\/sup> (3) of the Law of Georgia on Arbitration, timeframe for the competent court to deem the award recognized and enforceable is 30 days.<\/p>\n<p>There is no possibility to bring a motion for the recognition and enforcement of an award on an <em>ex parte<\/em> basis. Moreover, application of a party seeking for the recognition and enforcement of an award is sent to the party against whom the arbitration award was rendered. The latter in turn is given the possibility to file an application to proof that the legal grounds for recognition and enforcement of an award do not exist Under Article 356<sup>21<\/sup> (2<sup>1<\/sup>) of the \u00a0Civil Procedure Code of Georgia<\/p>\n<p>The standard of review adopted by Georgian courts for recognition and enforcement of a foreign award and a domestic award is similar. However, there are some differences.<\/p>\n<p>First of all, both Georgian and almost all local legislations ensure the enforcement of the decision rendered by the arbitral tribunals. In addition to the domestic law, the New York Convention is considered to be the basis for the effectiveness of arbitration in this regard.<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a> The Convention is based on a pro-enforcement attitude and therefore, it facilitates and ensures the enforcement of arbitration agreements and awards. By ratifying the Convention, compliance with the requirements of this Convention is binding on Georgia and the existence of a pro-enforcement attitude at the international level should be taken into consideration. Article 44 of the Law of Georgia on Arbitration concerns the issues regarding recognition and enforcement. Article 44 (1) of the Law of Georgia on Arbitration fully reflects the provision of Article 1 of the Convention that \u201cThis Convention shall apply to the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards made in the territory of a State other than the State where the recognition and enforcement of such awards are sought, and arising out of differences between persons, whether physical or legal. It shall also apply to arbitral awards not considered as domestic awards in the State where their recognition and enforcement are sought.\u201d Hence, domestic law provides for the mandatory enforcement of both Georgian and foreign arbitral awards. However, differentiated jurisdiction is established, namely the Courts of Appeal are considered to be the competent courts for decisions rendered in Georgia, and the Supreme Court of Georgia for foreign arbitral awards.<a href=\"#_ftn2\" name=\"_ftnref2\">[2]<\/a> The legislator opted for a unified Georgian regulatory system.<a href=\"#_ftn3\" name=\"_ftnref3\">[3]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>The motion of the party interested in the enforcement and recognition of the arbitral award, as well as any statement, must meet the grounds for its adoption in the proceedings.<a href=\"#_ftn4\" name=\"_ftnref4\">[4]<\/a> The party bringing a motion for recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards shall supply the original award, or a duly certified copy thereof, as well the original arbitration agreement referred to in Article 8 of this Law or a duly certified copy thereof (if any). If the award or arbitration agreement is not made in Georgian, the party shall supply a duly certified translation thereof into Georgian.<a href=\"#_ftn5\" name=\"_ftnref5\">[5]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>As for the authenticity of the original or a copy of the documents to be submitted, a document issued in a country party to The Hague Convention must be apostilled, and if the document is issued in a country, which is not a party to The Hague Convention of 5 October 1961 Abolishing the Requirement of Legalization for Foreign Public Documents, then the documents must be submitted to the court in a legalized form and with a duly certified translation into Georgian (notarized translation). According to international practice, it is not obligatory to submit a translation of the entire agreement and it is sufficient to submit only an excerpt that includes an arbitration clause.<a href=\"#_ftn6\" name=\"_ftnref6\">[6]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, the law of Georgia completely defines the grounds for refusal of the recognition-enforcement. Of these grounds, public order is the only means by which a court can deal with a substantive part of an arbitral award.<a href=\"#_ftn7\" name=\"_ftnref7\">[7]<\/a> Public order of national and international scale is differentiated. While courts may take into account only the equivalent (substantive or procedural) values \u200b\u200bof public order in their domestic arbitral awards, in the case of foreign arbitral awards, the courts must take into consideration the international nature of the dispute, the needs of international trade and only consider those rules as public order, which the Country wants to follow in the international context as well.<a href=\"#_ftn8\" name=\"_ftnref8\">[8]<\/a> Even though the latter approach is not yet followed by the Georgian Courts, The Supreme Court of Georgia should still give priority to the wording of the New York Convention in recognizing and enforcing foreign arbitral awards, hence to Convention\u2019s &#8220;pro-enforcement attitude&#8221; and use public order to prevent the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards only in special and rare cases. The necessity of such an approach is conditioned by the Law of Georgia on Normative Acts, which gives the international treaty, in this case the New York Convention, the precedence over the law.<a href=\"#_ftn9\" name=\"_ftnref9\">[9]<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> <em>Machaidze<\/em><em>, Otar<\/em>, Conditions of Application, Recognition and Enforcement of Interim Measures in Arbitral Proceedings, 2020, Tbilisi, p.28, is available at: &lt;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.jtconsulting-geo.com\/uploads\/files\/publications\/8\/ghonisdziebebis-gamoyenebis-da-tsnoba-aghsrulebis-pirobebi.pdf\">https:\/\/www.jtconsulting-geo.com\/uploads\/files\/publications\/8\/ghonisdziebebis-gamoyenebis-da-tsnoba-aghsrulebis-pirobebi.pdf<\/a>&gt;<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref2\" name=\"_ftn2\">[2]<\/a> <em>Tsertsvadze<\/em>, <em>Giorgi<\/em>, International Arbitration (Comparative Analysis), Publishing House \u201cMeridiani\u201d, Tbilisi 2012, p.701, Group of Authors, Sophie Tkemaladze (Editor-in-Chief), A Guide to Arbitration for Judges of the Courts of Appeal of Georgia, Arbitration Initiative Georgia, EU4Justice, UNDP Georgia (2018), p. 97<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref3\" name=\"_ftn3\">[3]<\/a> <em>Tsertsvadze<\/em>, <em>Giorgi<\/em>, Interpretation and Application of the New York Convention in the Republic of Georgia, Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, George A. Bermann (Editor), Ius Comparatum \u2013 Global Studies in Comparative Law, Volume 23, p.318<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref4\" name=\"_ftn4\">[4]<\/a> Group of Authors, Sophie Tkemaladze (Editor-in-Chief), A Guide to Arbitration for Judges of the Courts of Appeal of Georgia, Arbitration Initiative Georgia, EU4Justice, UNDP Georgia (2018), p. 96<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref5\" name=\"_ftn5\">[5]<\/a> <em>Ibid<\/em>., p. 98<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref6\" name=\"_ftn6\">[6]<\/a> <em>Titberidze<\/em><em>, Giorgi<\/em>, The Law of Georgia on Arbitration, Commentary, Second Edition, 2020, Tbilisi, pp. 205-208, A Guide to Arbitration for Judges of the Courts of Appeal of Georgia, p. 102<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref7\" name=\"_ftn7\">[7]<\/a> <em>Tkemaladze<\/em><em>, Sophio<\/em><em>,<\/em> Georgian Business Law Review, &#8220;Public order&#8221; as a ground for annulment of the arbitral award or refusal on recognition-enforcement\u00a0 (a brief overview of Georgian practice), 2013, p.15<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref8\" name=\"_ftn8\">[8]<\/a> <em>Ibid<\/em>., p.19<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref9\" name=\"_ftn9\">[9]<\/a> <em>Ibid<\/em>., p.20<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Can arbitration awards be appealed or challenged in local courts? What are the grounds and procedure in this regard? Is it possible for parties to waive any rights of appeal or challenge to an award by agreement?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Under Article 356<sup>21<\/sup> (6) of the Georgian Civil Procedure Code, Georgian court decisions concerning arbitration are generally not appealable. The Supreme Court\u2019s only authority provided for by arbitration law is recognition and enforcement of foreign awards. There is no appeal; the only option is to reopen the case and seek a judgement that the judicial decision is void due to the new circumstances.<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a> Georgian Arbitration Law\u2019s provisions governing arbitral awards are generally in compliance with the corresponding provisions of the UNCITRAL Model Law.<a href=\"#_ftn2\" name=\"_ftnref2\">[2]<\/a> Georgian law, like the UNCITRAL Model Law, provides only one legal remedy against an arbitral award. In particular, a party having a claim against an arbitral award may request setting aside an arbitration award.<a href=\"#_ftn3\" name=\"_ftnref3\">[3]<\/a> An arbitral award may only be appealed by applying to\u00a0 court for setting aside motion. Such cases are heard by the courts of appeal of Georgia. According to Article 356<sup>24<\/sup> of Civil Procedure Code of Georgia \u201cBased on the grounds defined under the Law of Georgia on Arbitration, an arbitration award shall be reversed by filing an appeal with a court.\u201d The law allows the party against whom the final arbitral award is rendered to object to it and defines the grounds the existence of which lead to the setting aside of an arbitration award, rendered in Georgia. In addition, the grounds for the setting aside of the decision are comprehensive and the court is bound by these grounds, which means that the court does not enter into a substantive hearing of the dispute and does not examine and evaluate the evidence presented by the parties.<a href=\"#_ftn4\" name=\"_ftnref4\">[4]<\/a> Consideration of the issue of setting aside an arbitration award does not in any case involve revision of the substantive part of the decision.<a href=\"#_ftn5\" name=\"_ftnref5\">[5]<\/a> The grounds for setting aside an arbitral award is comprehensively listed in Article 42 (Paragraphs 2 \u2013 5), that is also based on the 2006 edition of the UNCITRAL Model Law Article 2 A.<a href=\"#_ftn6\" name=\"_ftnref6\">[6]<\/a> According to Article 42 (2), \u201cAn arbitration award made in Georgia may be set aside by a court only if: a) the party against whom the award is rendered files a complaint with the court and furnishes proof that: a.a) a party, when executing the arbitration agreement was legally incapable or was a beneficiary of support and a legal guardian was appointed for the party with relation to the issues under the arbitration agreement but the support has not been obtained, or that said agreement is not valid or is null and void according to the law chosen by the parties have subjected it, and in the case of absence of such an indication, in accordance with the legislation of Georgia. a.b) a party, requesting an arbitration award to be set aside was not given proper notice of the appointment of an arbitrator or of the arbitration proceedings, or was otherwise unable to present his\/her case or protect his\/her interests; a.c) the arbitration award is rendered on a dispute, that was not submitted to the arbitral tribunal by the parties, or the arbitration award contains decisions on matters beyond the scope of the request submitted to the arbitral tribunal, provided that, if the decisions on matters submitted to arbitration can be separated from those not so submitted, only that part of the award which contains decisions on matters not submitted to arbitration may be set aside; a.d) the composition of the arbitral tribunal or the arbitral procedure did not comply with the agreement of the parties, or in the cases of absence of such an agreement, did not comply with this Law; b) the court finds that: b.a) the subject-matter of the dispute may not be settled by arbitration according to the legislation of Georgia; b.b) the award is in conflict with the public order of Georgia\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>The procedure is also determined by Article 42, according to which, \u201cA party may submit a complaint to set aside an arbitral award with a court within 90 days after the date on which the award was served on the party. The court is obliged to review the appeal and issue a motivated decision within 30 days of receiving the appeal. If a request has been made under Article 41 of the Arbitration Law, the period for making the application to set aside shall begin from the date on which the respective award reacting to the request was served on the parties. In the case of submitting complaint to a court to set aside an arbitration award, enforcement of the arbitration award shall not be suspended, except in a case that an application to set aside or suspend an award has been filed to the court, the court where the recognition or enforcement is sought may, if it considers it proper, adjourn its decision for no longer than 30 days, and may also, on the request of the party claiming recognition or enforcement of the award, order the other party to provide appropriate security. If the court renders a judgement to recognize and enforce the arbitration award, no award shall be set aside on the grounds that a party requested to refuse recognition and enforcement of the award that the court denied while hearing the case on its merits. In this case, the complaint to set aside the arbitration reward may not be acceptable; if the complaint has been accepted, the proceedings shall be terminated\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>Also, according to Article 43 The court, when asked to set aside an award, is authorized, where requested by a motion of a party, to suspend setting aside proceedings for a period of time no longer than thirty days in order to give the arbitral tribunal an opportunity to resume the arbitral proceedings, or to take such other action as in the arbitral tribunal\u2019s opinion will eliminate the grounds for setting aside the award. The court shall notify the arbitral tribunal about a suspension based on these grounds, within three days after the suspension of the proceedings to set aside the award.<\/p>\n<p>In one case, The applicant sought annulment of the award relying on several grounds under Article 42, including the alleged invalidity of the arbitration agreement, breach of the principle of equality, and procedural irregularities. The Court of Appeal emphasized that it is empowered to annul an award only within the narrow limits established by the Law on Arbitration.<a href=\"#_ftn7\" name=\"_ftnref7\">[7]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>The courts of model law countries have different practices as to whether it is possible to limit or cancel any rights of appeal or challenge of an award by agreement of the parties.<a href=\"#_ftn8\" name=\"_ftnref8\">[8]<\/a> Georgian law does not explicitly provide that the parties can waive any rights of appeal or challenge to an award by agreement before the dispute arises. According to the party autonomy principle parties can make certain arrangements under the arbitration agreement. For instance, exclude the use of interim measures. However, waiving any rights of appeal or challenge to an award by agreement before the dispute arises<strong>,<\/strong> may be considered unjustifiable, because of the importance of all or some of the procedural guarantees.<a href=\"#_ftn9\" name=\"_ftnref9\">[9]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>Parties cannot contract out of the right to challenge arbitral awards on the limited statutory grounds provided by law. The Court of Appeal in its decision stressed that had the claimant known about the respondent\u2019s representative\u2019s affiliation with the arbitral institution, it would not have agreed to the arbitration clause in the first place. The court therefore concluded that the arbitration agreement contravened morality and could not bind the claimant. This reasoning illustrates that Georgian courts retain oversight over the validity of arbitration agreements despite party autonomy, and that waivers of challenge rights before a dispute arises will not be enforceable.<a href=\"#_ftn10\" name=\"_ftnref10\">[10]<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> <em>Tsertsvadze<\/em>, <em>Giorgi<\/em>, International Arbitration (Comparative Analysis), Publishing House \u201cMeridiani\u201d, Tbilisi 2012, p.701; <em>Tsertsvadze<\/em>, <em>Giorgi<\/em>, Interpretation and Application of the New York Convention in the Republic of Georgia, Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, George A. Bermann (Editor), Ius Comparatum \u2013 Global Studies in Comparative Law, Volume 23, p.327<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref2\" name=\"_ftn2\">[2]<\/a> <em>Tsertsvadze<\/em>, <em>Giorgi<\/em>, Interpretation and Application of the New York Convention in the Republic of Georgia, Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, George A. Bermann (Editor), Ius Comparatum \u2013 Global Studies in Comparative Law, Volume 23, p.318<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref3\" name=\"_ftn3\">[3]<\/a> Group of Authors, Sophie Tkemaladze (Editor-in-Chief), A Guide to Arbitration for Judges of the Courts of Appeal of Georgia, Arbitration Initiative Georgia, EU4Justice, UNDP Georgia (2018), p.65<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref4\" name=\"_ftn4\">[4]<\/a> Tbilisi Court of Appeals, Case \u2116 2\u10d1\/3782-17, September 14, 2017<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref5\" name=\"_ftn5\">[5]<\/a> <em>Titberidze<\/em><em>, Giorgi<\/em>, The Law of Georgia on Arbitration, Commentary, Second Edition, 2020, Tbilisi, p. 192<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref6\" name=\"_ftn6\">[6]<\/a> <em>Ibid<\/em>., p. 193<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref7\" name=\"_ftn7\">[7]<\/a> Tbilisi Court of Appeals Ruling, Case \u21162\u10d1\/1222-23, June 27, 2025<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref8\" name=\"_ftn8\">[8]<\/a> Group of Authors, Sophie Tkemaladze (Editor-in-Chief), A Guide to Arbitration for Judges of the Courts of Appeal of Georgia, Arbitration Initiative Georgia, EU4Justice, UNDP Georgia (2018), p.85<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref9\" name=\"_ftn9\">[9]<\/a> <em>Ibid<\/em>., p.87<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref10\" name=\"_ftn10\">[10]<\/a> Tbilisi Court of Appeals Ruling, Case, Dated July 10, 2024<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">In what instances can third parties or non-signatories be bound by an award? To what extent might a third party challenge the recognition of an award?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Normally, only the parties to the arbitration proceedings are bound by the arbitral award.<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a> As for third parties or non-signatories, Georgia&#8217;s practice in this regard is very limited.<a href=\"#_ftn2\" name=\"_ftnref2\">[2]<\/a> The law of Georgia does not directly provide for the arbitral award to be extended to third parties.<a href=\"#_ftn3\" name=\"_ftnref3\">[3]<\/a> In the process of arbitration, succession of the title is possible, during which the parties are not signatories to the arbitration agreement, that means that they did not directly agree on the arbitration agreement, however they are automatically subject to the terms of the existing arbitration agreement.<a href=\"#_ftn4\" name=\"_ftnref4\">[4]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>As, for other instances, it should be noted that from case-law and arbitration practice the issue of whether third parties may be bound by an arbitral award is specific and must be decided on the basis of a detailed analysis of circumstances of each particular case.<a href=\"#_ftn5\" name=\"_ftnref5\">[5]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>The rights and obligations set forth in the arbitration agreement may be transferred, or in extreme cases may be extended to a person who has assumed only a part of the obligations under the main contract.<a href=\"#_ftn6\" name=\"_ftnref6\">[6]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>One ruling of the Tbilisi Court of Appeals is interesting, as the court in this case set the precedent of the dissemination of the legal consequences of the arbitration agreement to third parties. The court considered &#8220;renewal&#8221; and the complaint of \u201cKh. K\u201d. It is clear from the factual circumstances that \u201cKh. K.\u201d was neither a party to the arbitration agreement nor participated in the arbitration proceedings. Nevertheless, the legal consequences of the arbitration agreement were applied to him. The disputed area was registered as the property right of the author of the appeal, in compliance with all the rules; He was not a party to the arbitration agreement; He did not participate in the arbitration proceedings as a third party; The arbitral award unequivocally violated his right to property. This action of the court does not fit into any of the famous doctrines, thus proving once again that each particular case requires an individual approach.<a href=\"#_ftn7\" name=\"_ftnref7\">[7]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>Regarding to what extent might a third party challenge the recognition of an award, it should be emphasized, that Georgian legislation on arbitration does not specify the subject who can file an appeal and hence the legislation is not limited to the claimant or respondent. Depending on the content of the norm, the right to appeal may also be exercised by a third party whose interests are directly related to the specific arbitral award and the purpose of the judicial review is to eliminate such a violation.<a href=\"#_ftn8\" name=\"_ftnref8\">[8]<\/a> It should be noted that the courts of Georgia have a practice according to which it is considered permissible for an interested person to file an appeal against the setting aside of the arbitral award, even though that person is not a party to the arbitration agreement or proceedings. The practice regarding this matter is quite limited, The Law of Georgia on Arbitration lacks an express provision on third party or multiparty claims.<a href=\"#_ftn9\" name=\"_ftnref9\">[9]<\/a> The Kutaisi Court of Appeals ruled that the local self-government body was entitled to request the setting aside of the arbitral award, on the basis of which the arbitration assigned the state-owned land plot to one of the two disputed private persons. The Court noted the following circumstances: The arbitral tribunal was aware that the land was state-owned at the time of its decision.<a href=\"#_ftn10\" name=\"_ftnref10\">[10]<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> Group of Authors, Sophie Tkemaladze (Editor-in-Chief), A Guide to Arbitration for Judges of the Courts of Appeal of Georgia, Arbitration Initiative Georgia, EU4Justice, UNDP Georgia (2018), p.151<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref2\" name=\"_ftn2\">[2]<\/a> <em>Kazhashvili<\/em>, <em>Guliko<\/em>, Extension of the Legal Consequence of the Arbitration Agreement to the Third Parties, Georgian Commercial Law Review, II Issue, Tbilisi, 2013, p.93<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref3\" name=\"_ftn3\">[3]<\/a> <em>Tsertsvadze<\/em>, <em>Giorgi<\/em>, Brief Commentary to The Georgian Arbitration Law 2009, Publishing House \u201cUNIVERSAL\u201d, Tbilisi 2011, p.71<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref4\" name=\"_ftn4\">[4]<\/a><em> Ibid.<\/em>, pp. 35-36<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref5\" name=\"_ftn5\">[5]<\/a> <em>Tsertsvadze, Giorgi<\/em>, Prerequisites for International Arbitration Process (Comparative Analysis), 2008, p. 176<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref6\" name=\"_ftn6\">[6]<\/a> <em>Ibid.<\/em>, p. 178<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref7\" name=\"_ftn7\">[7]<\/a> <em>Kazhashvili,<\/em> <em>Guliko<\/em>, Extension of the Legal Consequence of the Arbitration Agreement to the Third Parties, Georgian Commercial Law Review, II Issue, Tbilisi, 2013, p.93<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref8\" name=\"_ftn8\">[8]<\/a> <em>Titberidze<\/em><em>, Giorgi<\/em>, The Law of Georgia on Arbitration, Commentary,\u00a0 Second Edition, 2020, Tbilisi, p. 202<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref9\" name=\"_ftn9\">[9]<\/a> <em>Tsertsvadze<\/em>, <em>Giorgi<\/em>, Brief Commentary to The Georgian Arbitration Law 2009, Publishing House \u201cUNIVERSAL\u201d, Tbilisi 2011, p.72<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref10\" name=\"_ftn10\">[10]<\/a> Kutaisi Court of Appeals, Case \u21162\u10d1-772-12, November 21, 2012<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are there any rules \/ court decisions that regulate or prohibit third party funding of arbitration proceedings \u2013 for instance, where funding by an entity not involved in the dispute in return for a share of the eventual award may be barred \u2013 in your jurisdiction?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>No. There are currently no specific rules or court decisions in our jurisdiction that regulate or prohibit third-party funding of arbitration proceedings.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Is emergency arbitrator relief available and recognized in your country? Are decisions made by emergency arbitrators readily enforceable?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Emergency arbitrator relief is available in Georgia, in some arbitral institutions. For Instance, According to Dispute Resolution Center (DRC) Rules \u201cAs per request of the party, the Tribunal, and before its composition \u2013 president of DRC Court, acting as an emergency arbitrator, in the shortest time possible, may, in writing, request from a party: (a) Maintenance and reestablishment of initial conditions before final award is made; (b) Taking measures to prevent any harm to another party, or arbitration itself; (c) Taking actions to maintain actives, to be used for execution of arbitration award; (d) Preserving and maintaining evidence, which could be used for arbitration and its decision.\u201d<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a> Arbitrator may change, cancel, or terminate application of interim measures identified by emergency arbitrator.<a href=\"#_ftn2\" name=\"_ftnref2\">[2]<\/a> Article 33 of the Georgian International Arbitration Centre (GIAC) Arbitration Rules permits a party requiring urgent interim measures that cannot await the constitution of the arbitral tribunal to apply for the appointment of an emergency arbitrator. The application may be made before the Request for Arbitration has been filed, provided that it is submitted before the case file is transmitted to the arbitral tribunal. Under Annex VI (Emergency Arbitrator Rules), the emergency arbitrator must ordinarily render a reasoned written decision within three days after transmission of the case file. The decision is binding on the parties when rendered, and by agreeing to arbitration under the GIAC Rules the parties undertake to comply with it without delay. The subsequently constituted arbitral tribunal may modify, terminate or annul the emergency arbitrator&#8217;s decision.<a href=\"#_ftn3\" name=\"_ftnref3\">[3]<\/a> This clearly demonstrates that emergency arbitrator relief is available in Georgia.<\/p>\n<p>Importantly, Georgian practice now supports the application of this enforcement regime to emergency-arbitrator relief. In GIAC Case No. 001-2024, an emergency arbitrator issued interim relief on 20 March 2024 pursuant to the GIAC Rules. The emergency arbitrator\u2019s decision was subsequently recognized and enforced by the Tbilisi Court of Appeal. This appears to be the first publicly reported Georgian instance confirming the enforceability of emergency-arbitrator relief.<a href=\"#_ftn4\" name=\"_ftnref4\">[4]<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> Dispute Resolution Centre (DRC) Arbitration Rules, Article 32(2)<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref2\" name=\"_ftn2\">[2]<\/a> Dispute Resolution Centre (DRC) Arbitration Rules, Article 32(8)<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref3\" name=\"_ftn3\">[3]<\/a> Georgian International Arbitration Centre (GIAC), Arbitration Rules (in force from 12 April 2024), Article 33; Annex VI, Articles 1, 3, 6 and 7.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref4\" name=\"_ftn4\">[4]<\/a> GIAC Case #001-2024, Emergency Arbitration order dated 20 March 2024<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are there arbitral laws or arbitration institutional rules in your country providing simplified or expedited procedures for claims under a certain value? Are they often used?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Yes. Georgian arbitration law permits simplified forms of arbitral proceedings, and the rules of certain Georgian arbitral institutions provide specific expedited procedures for lower-value disputes.<\/p>\n<p>The <strong>Law of Georgia on Arbitration<\/strong> permits proceedings to be conducted without an oral hearing. Under Article 32(1), if the parties have not agreed on the form of the proceedings, the arbitral tribunal may conduct the proceedings on the basis of documents and other evidence. However, unless the parties have agreed that no oral hearing will be held, the tribunal must hold an oral hearing at any stage of the proceedings if requested by either party.<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a> Accordingly, Georgian law recognizes the possibility of \u201cdocuments-only\u201d arbitration, subject to the parties\u2019 agreement and the right to request an oral hearing where that right has not been excluded.<\/p>\n<p>Institutional rules also provide for simplified and expedited proceedings. In particular, the <strong>Georgian International Arbitration Centre (\u201cGIAC\u201d) Arbitration Rules<\/strong> provide for <strong>Fast Track Arbitration Procedures<\/strong>. Under Article 36 of the GIAC Rules and Article 1(1) of Annex IV, the Fast Track Arbitration Procedures apply to all disputes where the amount in dispute does not exceed <strong>USD 100,000<\/strong> on the date the statement of claim is filed.<a href=\"#_ftn2\" name=\"_ftnref2\">[2]<\/a> The Fast Track Procedures do not apply where the parties have expressly excluded their application in the arbitration agreement. Where the arbitration agreement predates the entry into force of the Fast Track Procedures, they apply only if the parties agree otherwise. <a href=\"#_ftn3\" name=\"_ftnref3\">[3]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>The <strong>Tbilisi Arbitration Institute (\u201cTAI\u201d)<\/strong> also provides for simplified proceedings without an oral hearing. Under Article 8 of its Arbitration Rules, the parties may agree that the dispute will be determined without an oral hearing on the basis of written submissions and evidence. Article 36\u00b3 further provides a specific documents-only procedure: where the parties expressly agree to such procedure, the tribunal determines the dispute solely on the basis of documentary evidence, with shortened time limits for the defense, reply and issuance of the award.<a href=\"#_ftn4\" name=\"_ftnref4\">[4]<\/a> The current TAI fee schedule also provides a specifically reduced fee for certain low-value disputes conducted without an oral hearing.<\/p>\n<p>In practice, simplified and expedited procedures are available and used, particularly for lower-value and less complex disputes. Nevertheless, in more substantial commercial disputes, parties generally continue to prefer oral hearings, particularly where witness or expert evidence is involved. There does not appear to be publicly available comprehensive statistical data allowing the frequency of use of expedited procedures across Georgian arbitral institutions to be quantified.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> Law of Georgia on Arbitration, Article 32(1).<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref2\" name=\"_ftn2\">[2]<\/a> Georgian International Arbitration Centre (GIAC) Arbitration Rules, Article 36(1); Annex IV, Article 1(1).<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref3\" name=\"_ftn3\">[3]<\/a> Georgian International Arbitration Centre (GIAC) Arbitration Rules, Article 36(2)<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref4\" name=\"_ftn4\">[4]<\/a> Tbilisi Arbitration Institute Arbitration Rules, Articles 8.2\u20138.3 and 36\u00b3.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Have there been any recent court decisions in your country considering the setting aside of an award that has been enforced in another jurisdiction or vice versa?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>No, there have not been any decisions in Georgia considering the setting aside of an award that has been enforced in another jurisdiction or vice versa.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Have there been any recent court decisions in your country considering the issue of corruption? What standard do local courts apply for proving corruption? Which party bears the burden of proving corruption?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>There has not been any recent court decision in Georgia considering the issue of corruption. The issue is not commonly addressed in Georgian courts, however, according to scholarly opinion, The Supreme Court of Georgia uses the minimum standard of judicial intervention in resolving issues related to the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. There is no doubt that the minimum standard of judicial intervention covers fundamental principles of public order, such as contracts concluded as a result of corruption agreements.<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> <em>Kvirikashvili, Teo<\/em>, Examples of Corruption in International Arbitration: Permissible Limits for Judicial Review of Arbitral Tribunal Awards at Stages of Setting Aside and Enforcement, 2017, p.60<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Has your country withdrawn from, or announced its intention to withdraw from, the Energy Charter Treaty?  What is the status of the sunset clause in your jurisdiction?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>No. Georgia is a contracting party to the Energy Charter Treaty, which entered into force for Georgia on 16 April 1998, and it has neither withdrawn from the treaty nor announced any intention to do so.<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a> As a non-EU contracting party, Georgia remains fully bound by the treaty. Because Georgia has not withdrawn, the sunset clause has no present effect in relation to it. Should Georgia withdraw in the future, Article 47(2) of the treaty provides that withdrawal takes effect one year after written notice is received, and the sunset clause in Article 47(3) provides that the treaty continues to apply to investments made before the effective date of withdrawal for a further period of twenty years.<a href=\"#_ftn2\" name=\"_ftnref2\">[2]<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> Energy Charter Secretariat, Signatories and Contracting Parties to the Energy Charter Treaty; Georgia is a contracting party and has not withdrawn. Available at: https:\/\/www.energychartertreaty.org\/treaty\/contracting-parties-and-signatories\/<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref2\" name=\"_ftn2\">[2]<\/a> Energy Charter Treaty 1994, Article 47(2) (withdrawal takes effect one year after receipt of written notice) and Article 47(3) (continued application of the Treaty to investments made before the effective date of withdrawal for a period of 20 years).<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Have there been any recent court decisions or legislative developments in your country with respect to intra-European investor-State arbitration, the Energy Charter Treaty, or the enforcement of intra-EU? Are there any pending decisions?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>There have been no identified recent published decisions of the Georgian courts specifically addressing intra-EU investor-State arbitration, the application of the <em>Achmea<\/em> judgment, the Energy Charter Treaty in the intra-EU context, or the recognition and enforcement in Georgia of an intra-EU investment award.<\/p>\n<p>Georgia is not an EU Member State and disputes between Georgia and investors from EU Member States are therefore not, as such, intra-EU disputes. Nevertheless, Georgia could potentially become relevant as a non-EU enforcement jurisdiction if recognition or enforcement of an intra-EU award were sought against assets located in Georgia. Under Articles 44 and 45 of the Law of Georgia on Arbitration, foreign arbitral awards are subject to recognition and enforcement in Georgia, with the Supreme Court of Georgia being the competent court in respect of awards rendered outside Georgia. The statutory grounds for refusal broadly reflect the framework of the New York Convention.<\/p>\n<p>A related recent development is <strong><em>Zaza Okuashvili v. Georgia<\/em><\/strong>, an SCC investor-State arbitration seated in Stockholm under the UK-Georgia BIT, in conjunction with the Georgia-Belgo-Luxembourg Economic Union BIT. Georgia argued, among other jurisdictional objections, that the arbitration agreement was incompatible with EU law, relying on <em>Achmea<\/em>. The arbitral tribunal rejected that objection, distinguishing <em>Achmea<\/em> and subsequent intra-EU jurisprudence because the relevant investment treaties were between Georgia, a third State, and EU\/then-EU States and therefore concerned an <strong>extra-EU<\/strong>, rather than intra-EU, relationship.<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>The Swedish Supreme Court subsequently rendered a judgment on <strong>26 June 2026 (Case No. T 9380-24)<\/strong>. It held that the MFN clause in the UK-Georgia BIT could, subject to the requirements of the incorporated provision, provide access to SCC arbitration through the dispute-resolution provision in the Georgia-BLEU BIT. The Supreme Court set aside the Svea Court of Appeal&#8217;s earlier judgment and remitted the case to the Court of Appeal for determination of Georgia&#8217;s remaining jurisdictional objections.<a href=\"#_ftn2\" name=\"_ftnref2\">[2]<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> Zaza Okuashvili v. Georgia, SCC Case No. V 2019\/058, Partial Final Award on Jurisdiction and Admissibility, 31 August 2022, paras. 226\u2013229 et seq.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref2\" name=\"_ftn2\">[2]<\/a> Supreme Court of Sweden, Zaza Okuashvili v. Georgia, Case No. T 9380-24, Judgment, 26 June 2026<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Have arbitral institutions in your country implemented reforms towards greater use of technology and a more cost-effective conduct of arbitrations? Have there been any recent developments regarding virtual hearings?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Nowadays, \u00a0Georgian arbitral institutions have increasingly incorporated technology into the administration of proceedings, including electronic communications, remote or hybrid hearings and electronic filing of submissions. Virtual hearings, electronic communication of submissions, and online case management have been increasingly relied upon in arbitral practice. Recent developments include the use of hybrid hearings, as evidenced in the case practice, where one party attended physically while the other participated remotely. In one case, a party alleged that online hearings had limited its ability to present its case effectively. The court, however, found that the arbitration had continued in an in-person format, where both parties had equal opportunities to present and defend their positions. Accordingly, the appellate court rejected the argument that the party had been denied a fair hearing or that the principles of due process had been breached. Therefore, while the use of technology and virtual hearings has become a common feature of arbitration in Georgia, case law highlights the need for arbitral tribunals and institutions to ensure adequate technical arrangements and procedural safeguards to guarantee fairness.<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> Tbilisi Court of Appeals Ruling, Case \u21162\u10d1\/1222-23, June 27, 2025<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Have there been any recent judicial and\/or legislative developments in your jurisdiction with regard to disputes involving ESG issues such as climate change, sustainability, social responsibility and\/or human rights?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Amendments adopted in April 2026 introduced a greenhouse-gas emissions authorization and monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV) framework, scheduled to take effect on 1 January 2028.<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a>\u00a0 In March 2026, the Government updated Georgia\u2019s Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) under the Paris Agreement. Work is also underway on a comprehensive Climate Change Law and the country&#8217;s first National Adaptation Plan.<a href=\"#_ftn2\" name=\"_ftnref2\">[2]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>In March 2025, the National Bank of Georgia (NBG) introduced its Sustainable Finance Roadmap for 2025\u20132028, promoting ESG integration and climate-related risk management in the financial sector. In August 2025, the NBG also adopted regulations governing Green, Social, Sustainability and Sustainability-Linked (GSS+) bonds, effective from January 2026.<a href=\"#_ftn3\" name=\"_ftnref3\">[3]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>In January 2025, the Service for Accounting, Reporting and Auditing Supervision (SARAS) published Georgian translations of the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS). Its 2026\u20132032 Strategic Plan envisages gradual alignment with EU sustainability-reporting requirements, although a comprehensive CSRD\/ESRS reporting regime has not yet been introduced.<a href=\"#_ftn4\" name=\"_ftnref4\">[4]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>In February 2025, the Supreme Court of Georgia upheld the dismissal of an environmental damage claim concerning soil removal in a landslide-prone area. The Court found that, in the circumstances, the defendant&#8217;s actions constituted justified self-help to protect property, life and health, particularly given the authorities&#8217; failure to respond to repeated requests for intervention.<a href=\"#_ftn5\" name=\"_ftnref5\">[5]<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> Law of Georgia on Environmental Protection, Articles 51\u00b9\u201351\u00b2, as amended by Law No. 1525 of 28 April 2026.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref2\" name=\"_ftn2\">[2]<\/a> Government Resolution No. 122 of 25 March 2026; Parliament of Georgia, National Adaptation Plan announcement, 5 June 2026.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref3\" name=\"_ftn3\">[3]<\/a> NBG, Sustainable Finance Roadmap 2025\u20132028; Regulation on GSS+ Bond Status, adopted August 2025.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref4\" name=\"_ftn4\">[4]<\/a> SARAS, ESRS publication, January 2025; Strategic Plan 2026\u20132032.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref5\" name=\"_ftn5\">[5]<\/a> Supreme Court of Georgia, Case No. \u10d0\u10e1-665-2024, Ruling of 28 February 2025<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Have any international economic sanctions regimes been implemented (either independently, or based on EU law) in your jurisdiction recently? Have there been any recent decisions in your country considering the impact of sanctions on international arbitration proceedings?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>No. There have been no recent decisions in Georgia considering the impact of international economic sanctions on arbitration proceedings.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Has your country enacted any regulation and\/or implemented any rules, guidlines or regulations regarding the use of artificial intelligence (AI), generative AI or large language models in the context of dispute resolution?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>No, Georgia has not implemented any rules or regulations regarding the use of artificial intelligence, generative artificial intelligence or large language models in the context of international arbitration, nor in the wider context of dispute resolution. There is no Georgian legislation, and there are no rules or guidelines issued by the Georgian arbitral institutions or the courts, that specifically govern the use of artificial intelligence, generative artificial intelligence, or large language models in arbitral or judicial proceedings.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are there any specific legal, institutional, or procedural frameworks in your jurisdiction governing the arbitration of digital asset or blockchain-related disputes?  Have there been any court decisions in your jurisdiction concerning the validity or enforceability of arbitration agreements incorporated into smart contracts or digital asset terms?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>There is no specific legal, institutional, or procedural framework in Georgia governing the arbitration of digital-asset or blockchain-related disputes. Georgia does regulate the sector for anti-money-laundering purposes: virtual asset service providers must register with, and are supervised by, the National Bank of Georgia under amendments to the Law of Georgia on the National Bank of Georgia and the Law of Georgia on Facilitating the Prevention of Money Laundering and the Financing of Terrorism.<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a> That regime addresses licensing and compliance rather than dispute resolution, and neither the Law of Georgia on Arbitration nor the rules of the Georgian arbitral institutions contain provisions dealing with digital-asset or smart-contract disputes. There are no reported Georgian court decisions on the validity or enforceability of arbitration agreements incorporated into smart contracts or into digital-asset terms. Under the general rule in Article 8 of the Law of Georgia on Arbitration, an arbitration agreement is valid where its content is recorded in a form that is accessible for subsequent use, which suggests that an arbitration clause embedded in a smart contract or in electronic terms could meet the written-form requirement, although this has not yet been tested before the Georgian courts.<a href=\"#_ftn2\" name=\"_ftnref2\">[2]<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> Regulation of virtual asset service providers in Georgia through amendments to the Organic Law of Georgia on the National Bank of Georgia and the Law of Georgia on Facilitating the Prevention of Money Laundering and the Financing of Terrorism, virtual asset service providers must register with, and are supervised by, the National Bank of Georgia.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref2\" name=\"_ftn2\">[2]<\/a> Article 8 of the Law of Georgia on Arbitration (written-form requirement, including content recorded in a form accessible for subsequent use).<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\r\n<div class=\"word-count-hidden\" style=\"display:none;\">Estimated word count: <span class=\"word-count\">24918<\/span><\/div>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t<\/ol>\r\n\r\n<script type=\"text\/javascript\" src=\"\/wp-content\/themes\/twentyseventeen\/src\/jquery\/components\/filter-guides.js\" async><\/script><\/div>"}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comparative_guide\/152690","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comparative_guide"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/comparative_guide"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=152690"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}