1. Report Seminar “The NAI Summary Arbitral Proceedings, 15 years of experience” dated 5 April 2013
On April 5, 2013 the seminar “The NAI Summary Arbitral Proceedings, 15 years of experience” was held at the Koninklijke Amsterdamsche Roei- en Zeilvereeniging “De Hoop” in Amsterdam. Fredy von Hombracht-Brinkman welcomed the guests on behalf of the Netherlands Arbitration Institute and introduced the seminar. During this introduction, she explained the two different Summary Arbitral Proceedings regulations that the NAI Arbitration Rules have offered since 1998: the Article 37 Regulation, which offers the possibility for Summary Arbitral Proceedings after the appointment of the Arbitral Tribunal, and the independent Summary Arbitral Proceedings according to the Fourth Section A. Also the working method of the NAI was discussed in relation to these two Summary Arbitral Proceedings regulations. She also announced that the bill for the revision of the Arbitration Act would perhaps be submitted to the Tweede Kamer (Lower House) this month.
Next, she gave the floor to Martje Verhoeven-de Vries Lentsch, attorney at law with De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek N.V. Together with Rogier Schellaars, attorney at law with Simmons & Simmons LLP, she has held an independent study at the NAI of all Summary Arbitral Proceedings Awards rendered between 1998 and the end of 2012 with regard to the procedure of Fourth Section A. As a result of this study, Martje Verhoeven-de Vries Lentsch concluded that Summary Arbitral Proceedings provide a means of fast dispute resolution: in 76% of the cases an award was rendered within two months after filing the Summary Arbitral Proceedings request. Only in a few cases did the arbitrators conclude that they lacked jurisdiction to resolve the dispute or they determined that due to the complexity of the particular case that it should be resolved on the merits.
Generally, the arbitrator takes care of the case himself. The complexity is rarely a reason to reject a case or for referral to the Preliminary Relief Judge of the District Court. Therefore the arbitrator decides also in very complex Summary Arbitral Proceedings.
The next speaker of the afternoon, Bart Punt, former Vice-President of the Court in The Hague, shared his views about the Summary Arbitral Proceedings in relation to the Preliminary Relief Judge of the District Court. His views were emphasized by discussing a number of case law.
Then it was up to Rogier Schellaars to speak about Summary Arbitral Proceedings in an international context, with regard to the previously mentioned study. He found that both Dutch and non-Dutch parties make use of the NAI Summary Arbitral Proceedings to resolve disputes in various industries. In 37% of the cases one or more parties involved were non-Dutch and 7% were multiple-party litigation in which the majority of the parties were not Dutch. In 25% of these international arbitrations, that represent 9% of the total number of cases, all of the parties were non-Dutch. In 24 of these cases, it was the non-Dutch party that started the Summary Arbitral Proceedings. Therefore a considerable number of international parties make use of the NAI Summary Arbitral Proceedings. He also indicated the prospect that the current proposals to amend the Dutch Arbitration Act (which are reflected in a newly proposed Article 1043b Rv) do not provide for adjustments, or at least limitations, for the current valid regulations for the Summary Arbitral Proceedings.
The very successful seminar was closed by having drinks overlooking a beautiful view of the river the Amstel.
The results of this study can be viewed on the website of the NAI via the following link: http://www.nai-nl.org/downloads/KG_EN.pdf