IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/asr/journl/v12y2022i3p329-345.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An arbitration dilemma: party-appointed experts vs. tribunal-appointed experts.A comparative study

Author

Listed:
  • Ioan SCHIAU

    (Faculty of Law of the Transilvania University of BraÅŸov, Romania)

Abstract

Arbitration, as an alternate method of solving disputes, is greatly reliant on its capacity to offer an efficient procedure, in terms of costs involved and time consumed to reach a decision on parties’ disputes. Taking of evidence in a cost and time effective manner is, therefore, a vital issue, one that the parties and the arbitral tribunal consider with the utmost care; it is the screen that reflects the image that the parties are trying to credit as being the truth. Expert witnesses are often called upon to present a professional view on technical or economic aspects that cannot be decided by the arbitral tribunal without proper expert information. The object of this study is to offer a comparative analysis of the choices that the parties and the arbitral tribunal have to make in taking expert evidence as well as the implications of these choices.

Suggested Citation

  • Ioan SCHIAU, 2022. "An arbitration dilemma: party-appointed experts vs. tribunal-appointed experts.A comparative study," Juridical Tribune - Review of Comparative and International Law, Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies, vol. 12(3), pages 329-345, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:asr:journl:v:12:y:2022:i:3:p:329-345
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://tribunajuridica.eu/arhiva/An12v3/2.%20Ioan%20Schiau%20EN.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    : arbitration; expert witnesses; independents experts; party-appointed experts.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • K40 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:asr:journl:v:12:y:2022:i:3:p:329-345. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catalin-Silviu Sararu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aseeero.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.