Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 15 SEPTEMBER 2016

Arbitrators' Liability: Austrian Supreme Court Reconfirms Strict Standards

Schoenherr (Schönherr Rechtsanwälte)
Schoenherr (Schönherr Rechtsanwälte)
Contributor
Schoenherr (Schönherr Rechtsanwälte)

Schoenherr (Schönherr Rechtsanwälte)

Schoenherr is a leading European full-service law firm with a strong footprint across Central and...

View firm profile
Explore more from Schoenherr (Schönherr Rechtsanwälte)

One of the main advantages of arbitration vis-à-vis state court litigation, is that the parties are free to choose independent and highly specialised experts to decide their cases.

AustriaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

One of the main advantages of arbitration vis-à-vis state court litigation, is that the parties are free to choose independent and highly specialised experts to decide their cases. Yet, if these experts negligently (or even deliberately) violate the duties that come with the acceptance of the appointment, the issue of liability arises. One may think of instances such as unjustified delays in the rendering of the arbitral award, the deliberate non-disclosure of information that excludes the respective individual from serving as arbitrator, or procedural conduct that gives rise to a setting aside of the arbitral award. The relevance of the issue seems even more striking considering that available remedies, such as the possibility to challenge and even remove the arbitrator from office or the setting aside of the award, do not encompass monetary compensation for damage effectively suffered by the parties. Despite its practical importance and the growing number of (legally

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from