A Comparative Overview of Arbitration Laws: Swedish Arbitration Act 1999, English Arbitration Act 1996 and Russian Federal Law on International Commercial Arbitration 1993

Abstract

AS A sweeping generalization, it would be fair to say that differences in national legislation on arbitration under the various legal regimes of Sweden, England and the Russian Federation in the case of the average arbitration will not have any tangible impact on the course of the proceedings.1 There are three main reasons: However, there are a number of specific differences between the arbitration laws in England, Russia and Sweden and practitioners would be well advised to take these into account when drafting arbitration clauses and also when proceeding to arbitration in any particular jurisdiction. The arbitration laws of England, Russia and Sweden presently in force are all the result of recent legislation (1996, 1993 and 1999 respectively). All of them therefore without a doubt represent state-of-the-art proponents of arbitration law. ### (a) The Impact of the UNCITRAL Model Law Most arbitration laws which have been enacted in recent times have incorporated the UNCITRAL Model Law more or less wholesale (examples are Germany, Australia, Canada and Mexico). This has ensured a standardized approach to procedural issues arising in arbitration. However, neither England nor Sweden has chosen this approach; instead the legislatures in these countries have decided to build on previous domestic history of the law and practice of arbitration. But in so doing these countries as far as possible have taken the solutions offered by the Model Law into consideration.2 In Soviet times ad hoc arbitration was not an option in respect of proceedings taking place within the …