In the Heat of Dissent

Descripción del Articulo

Dissent in arbitration is often not well-regarded. It is argued that dissenting votes debilitate the authority of the awards and thus that of arbitration since they only promote the career, or vent the ego, of the arbitrator who did not convince the majority. In this paper, the author, contrary to t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor: Berckemeyer Olaechea, Fernando
Formato: artículo
Fecha de Publicación:2020
Institución:Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Repositorio:Revistas - Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Lenguaje:español
OAI Identifier:oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/23486
Enlace del recurso:http://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/themis/article/view/23486
Nivel de acceso:acceso abierto
Materia:Dissent
arbitral award
majority vote
“mind-of-three”
appointment
Disenso
laudo arbitral
voto en mayoría
“mente-de-a-tres”
designación
id REVPUCP_b43191c993b0c4c3f962106aa48e984c
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/23486
network_acronym_str REVPUCP
network_name_str Revistas - Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
repository_id_str
spelling In the Heat of DissentAl calor de un disensoBerckemeyer Olaechea, FernandoDissentarbitral awardmajority vote“mind-of-three”appointmentDisensolaudo arbitralvoto en mayoría“mente-de-a-tres”designaciónDissent in arbitration is often not well-regarded. It is argued that dissenting votes debilitate the authority of the awards and thus that of arbitration since they only promote the career, or vent the ego, of the arbitrator who did not convince the majority. In this paper, the author, contrary to the prevailing opinion, defends the convenience of the dissenting vote as an element which –even when it remains as a slight possibility– serves to the proper functioning of the tribunal as a “mind-of-three”.Consequently, the paper relativizes the data generally used to argue against dissent in arbitration, assesses the different types of dissenting votes and challenges the standards by which the current state of thinking holds this mechanism should be limited and monitored. Instead, the author proposes a system in which “each dissenting vote is the best judge of itself” and where there are only ex post and market dissent controls.En el arbitraje los disensos no suelen ser bien vistos. Se sostiene que debilitan la autoridad de los laudos y, con ella la del arbitraje, sirviendo en los hechos solo para la promoción de la carrera, o el desfogue del ego, del árbitro que no logró convencer a la mayoría. En este artículo, el autor va contra la opinión preponderante y hace una defensa de la utilidad del voto disidente como un elemento que –incluso cuando permanece solo como pura posibilidad– sirve al buen funcionamiento del tribunal como “una mente de a tres”.En ese sentido, el artículo relativiza la estadística que suele usarse para argumentar contra el disen-so arbitral, analiza los diferentes tipos de votos disidentes y cuestiona los estándares con los que una importante corriente doctrinaria sostiene se debería limitar y medir a la institución. En su lugar, propone un sistema en el que “cada voto disidente es el mejor juez de sí mismo” y donde los controles de los disensos sean solo ex post y de mercado.Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú2020-12-21info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdftext/htmlhttp://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/themis/article/view/23486THEMIS Revista de Derecho; Núm. 77 (2020): Arbitraje; 303-3141810-9934reponame:Revistas - Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perúinstname:Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perúinstacron:PUCPspahttp://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/themis/article/view/23486/22465http://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/themis/article/view/23486/22500https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessoai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/234862024-02-08T13:27:33Z
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv In the Heat of Dissent
Al calor de un disenso
title In the Heat of Dissent
spellingShingle In the Heat of Dissent
Berckemeyer Olaechea, Fernando
Dissent
arbitral award
majority vote
“mind-of-three”
appointment
Disenso
laudo arbitral
voto en mayoría
“mente-de-a-tres”
designación
title_short In the Heat of Dissent
title_full In the Heat of Dissent
title_fullStr In the Heat of Dissent
title_full_unstemmed In the Heat of Dissent
title_sort In the Heat of Dissent
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Berckemeyer Olaechea, Fernando
author Berckemeyer Olaechea, Fernando
author_facet Berckemeyer Olaechea, Fernando
author_role author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Dissent
arbitral award
majority vote
“mind-of-three”
appointment
Disenso
laudo arbitral
voto en mayoría
“mente-de-a-tres”
designación
topic Dissent
arbitral award
majority vote
“mind-of-three”
appointment
Disenso
laudo arbitral
voto en mayoría
“mente-de-a-tres”
designación
description Dissent in arbitration is often not well-regarded. It is argued that dissenting votes debilitate the authority of the awards and thus that of arbitration since they only promote the career, or vent the ego, of the arbitrator who did not convince the majority. In this paper, the author, contrary to the prevailing opinion, defends the convenience of the dissenting vote as an element which –even when it remains as a slight possibility– serves to the proper functioning of the tribunal as a “mind-of-three”.Consequently, the paper relativizes the data generally used to argue against dissent in arbitration, assesses the different types of dissenting votes and challenges the standards by which the current state of thinking holds this mechanism should be limited and monitored. Instead, the author proposes a system in which “each dissenting vote is the best judge of itself” and where there are only ex post and market dissent controls.
publishDate 2020
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2020-12-21
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/themis/article/view/23486
url http://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/themis/article/view/23486
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv spa
language spa
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv http://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/themis/article/view/23486/22465
http://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/themis/article/view/23486/22500
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv THEMIS Revista de Derecho; Núm. 77 (2020): Arbitraje; 303-314
1810-9934
reponame:Revistas - Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
instname:Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
instacron:PUCP
instname_str Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
instacron_str PUCP
institution PUCP
reponame_str Revistas - Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
collection Revistas - Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
repository.name.fl_str_mv
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1847243917559332864
score 13.444865
Nota importante:
La información contenida en este registro es de entera responsabilidad de la institución que gestiona el repositorio institucional donde esta contenido este documento o set de datos. El CONCYTEC no se hace responsable por los contenidos (publicaciones y/o datos) accesibles a través del Repositorio Nacional Digital de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación de Acceso Abierto (ALICIA).