Abstract
The aim of this Article is to assess what is the effectiveness of an arbitration agreement in the face of a plaintiff's will to activate the procedure not before the Arbitral Tribunal, but using legal proceedings before the ordinary courts, in the particular case of the other party failing to enter an appearance and file its response in litigation. The hypothesis of this paper, therefore, refer to situations where the contumacy of the party before the Court (i.e., defaulting defendant in litigation) - in certain cases - is not protected by law, and whether this legislative gap should be filled. The problem relates to the defaulting of defendant in litigation, despite an existing arbitration agreement whose validity is not questioned by the plaintiff. This solution varies depending on the system and does not apply where the legislative gap has been eliminated by national regulation. In order to solve that question will be analysed Article II.3 NY Convention, Art. 8(1) UNCITRAL Model on International Commercial Arbitration and the Italian and Brazilian Legal Systems.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
