Acta Iuris Stetinensis

The efficiency of the proceedings constitutes basic incentive for the choice of the arbitration way of disputes settlement. The practical experience indicates that it is rather a postulate than a reality. This again requires the identification of reasons of delay in the proceedings and the consideration of the counteractive measures. The reasons occur already in the stage of the proceedings initiating and of the completion of the arbitration panel – both showing specifics not present in the jurisdiction of state courts. The difficulties relating to initiating of the proceedings may involve problems of breaking the prescription period and therefore impair the sense of the proceedings. The most substantial risks of delay occur in the hearing of evidence. It is the area for special initiative and determination of the arbitrators – up to rejection of the delayed evidence applications of the parties – in order to keep the time framework of the proceedings. Obviously beyond that framework there is the perspective of judicial control of the arbitration award executed upon a claim for setting aside thereof. That perspective cannot be modified contractually. The related risk of delay may be reduced only through a high standard of the arbitration award itself as well as the fair procedure of the trial.