Malta Arbitration Centre celebrates 10th anniversary
VALLETTA, February 29, 2008: The Malta Arbitration Centre today marked the tenth anniversary of the coming into force of the Arbitration Act with a business breakfast at the Casino Maltese in Valletta.
The event also saw the launch of a commemorative publication. This outlines the major changes in legislation to date, gives information on the publications issued by the Centre, lists the Boards of Governors, Domestic and International Arbitration Panels, Procedures for Mandatory and Voluntary Arbitrations, and also contains statistics on the cases filed with the Centre since 2000.
Among the speakers at the event were Malta Arbitration Centre Chairman Dr George M. Hyzler, and the Centre’s Registrar Dr Fiona Farrugia. The guests included representatives of the Malta Chamber of Commerce and Enterprise, the Chamber of Advocates, Middlesea Insurance plc as well as a number of other insurance companies, and the GRTU Secretary General, Mr Vincent Farrugia also addressed those present.
Dr Hyzler said that the compact organization at the Malta Arbitration Centre has coped remarkably well with the dramatic increase in the number of arbitrations that were introduced as a result of the introduction of Mandatory Arbitrations in 2004, principally those related to traffic cases, as well as certain condominium cases, and disputes relating to electricity and water services (2006). This has resulted in a 1,000% increase in the Centre’s caseload in just over three years. The Centre whilst continuing to administer these cases efficiently, shall now resume its mission to promote arbitration as an alternative method of settlement of disputes, particularly for the business community.
In her presentation, Dr Farrugia listed some of the main advantages of arbitration:
- it is less expensive than Court proceedings;
- it is confidential;
- the parties can choose experts to decide the dispute; and
- it is faster than Court litigation.
Yet an award following arbitration has the validity of a court judgment. The dispute is resolved completely, since there is finality, and it is less formal than proceedings in a Court of Law. The parties can even agree on where and what time to hold arbitration hearings.
Looking back on the origins of the Arbitration Act, Dr Farrugia said this is based on the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration. “We have a very good law, but we have to use it properly,” she said. “The legal infrastructure is there. We are making improvements to the law as time goes by and we constantly take note of any feedback we receive.”
Dr Farrugia went on to give an outline of the arbitration procedure, stressing the importance to opt for an arbitration clause in business contracts before relations turn sour. This is the case currently in 90% of cases that are referred to arbitration, with the remaining 10% agreeing to go to arbitration after a dispute has arisen.
Today, the Constitutional Court delivered a judgement in the appeal proceedings instituted by the Attorney General following the judgement delivered by the First Hall of the Civil Court on the 19th October 2007. The First Hall of the Civil Court presided by Mr Justice Tonio Mallia had decided that the mandatory referral of traffic collisions disputes to arbitration by virtue of Legal Notice 279 of 2005 constituted a violation of the fundamental human right to a fair hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal. The Constitutional Court revoked the said judgement on the basis that the Small Claims Tribunal was not legally entitled to refer constitutional matters to the First Hall Civil Court and consequently the Constitutional Court remitted the case to the Small Claims Tribunal for a decision on the merits. |
