פוסט אורח: בוררות בינלאומית – לימודים מסקוטלנד / עו"ד מיכאל מילר
יש מספר נקודות דימיון בין ישראל ובין סקוטלנד. כמו בישראל, גם בסקוטלנד קיימות שתי ערים עקרוניות – הבירה (אדינבורו, כמו ירושלים) והמרכז המסחרי (גלזגו, כמו תל אביב). הערים נפרדות כ- 60-50 ק"מ האחת מהשניה. נקודה נוספת לדימיון נעוצה באנרגיה, גז ונפט. לא רחוק מהחוף הסקוטי בים הצפוני, נמצאו מרבצי נפט גדולים, ותעשייה שלמה צמחה מהם. בים התיכון, למי מאיתנו שלא קרא עיתונים בחודשים האחרונים, התגלו מרבצי גז גדולים, ותעשיה גדולה עומדת לצמוח.
בין ישראל ובין סקוטלנד יש כמה וכמה נושאים משותפים מסחריים ולא מסחריים, אך ניתן ללמוד מסקוטלנד גם כמה וכמה דברים בנושא בוררות בינלאומית. הממשלה הסקוטית שוקלת בימים אלו הקמת מרכז בוררות סקוטי- גם ממשלת ישראל יכולה למצוא עניין בנושא זה.
על סקוטלנד, ישראל ובוררות בינלאומית- במאמר שלפניכם.
* עו"ד מיכאל מילר הינו מנהל משרד עו"ד מיכאל מילר (www.miller-lawoffice.com)
———————————————————————
Perhaps the Scots can teach us a few things / Adv. Michael Miller
Before coming to Israel and establishing my Israeli law firm, I grew up in Scotland and qualified as a member of the Scottish Faculty of Advocates. Together with my legal experience I have brought to Israel my love for golf, hiking, Scottish smoked salmon, and whisky. On the way to Israel I also qualified as an English Barrister and worked in London
It is interesting to note the different expectations of lawyers and their clients coming from varied legal and cultural backgrounds but especially the differences with regard to International Arbitration
For instance, one of the tasks of an international arbitrator is to decide how facts are to be proved. Without witness statements, an English trained lawyer may question whether the facts can be proved properly. Whereas a Scottish trained lawyer will not be used to spending time and money preparing witness statements but may look to the oral testimony for the facts. The Israeli trained lawyer may also look for answers to written interrogatories
The Scottish approach- perhaps worth a look
In its approach to encourage Israel as a forum for international arbitration, the Israeli legal community may be interested in looking at the UK and in particular at the Scottish approach
Like Israel, Scotland has a mixed legal system of common law and civil law general principles. Whereas the English Arbitration Act dates from 1996, Scotland enacted a new Arbitration Act in 2010
More than ten years ago I was on the committee which then considered a new Scottish arbitration law. The Scots like the English have followed but not adopted the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (the UNCITRAL) Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration. It is one of the few success stories which has come out of the UN
In preparing the new Scottish Arbitration Act, its drafters researched many jurisdictions around the world to discover the best practice. A Scottish innovation is that the user-friendly provisions called the Scottish Arbitration Rules are divided into Mandatory rules which must apply to every arbitration taking place in Scotland and Default rules which can be changed or replaced by the parties
For example the parties can decide whether they prefer the default rules to govern the arbitration, or institutional rules such as those of the International Chamber of Commerce (the ICC). The Israeli legal community may find this set-up attractive and may wish to adopt it in Israel
Following the Barnowitz case 6830/00, Israel introduced an amendment in 2004 to the Israeli Arbitration Law 1968. The parties can appeal an arbitral award to another arbitral tribunal. From an international perspective this step may not be that appealing (!) since it is unlikely to save time and money where the international parties may still end up before an Israeli court
Adv. Michael Miller is the principal of MILLER LAW OFFICE (www.miller-lawoffice.com)
