Opposing party's refusal to appoint an arbitrator does not constitute misconduct warranting cost liability.
Slovenia (SI)
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, overturning the first-instance decision to award costs against the opposing party. The appellant argued that the opponent's refusal to appoint an arbitrator constituted misconduct under the principle of fault-based cost allocation. The court ruled that such refusal, when based on a disputed contractual interpretation, does not automatically qualify as wrongful conduct requiring cost liability.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedZakon o reševanju sporov z arbitražnimi postopki; Zakon o sodnih postopkih: The refusal of an opposing party to appoint an arbitrator, even if contested, does not constitute misconduct justifying the award of costs against them under the principle of fault.
Keywords
AI generatedCited Legislation
AI generatedFull text
I. Pritožbi se ugodi in se izpodbijani sklep tako spremeni, da predlagatelj in nasprotni udeleženec krijeta vsak svoje stroške postopka.
II. Nasprotni udeleženec sam krije svoje pritožbene stroške.
[JEDRO]
Opustitev imenovanja arbitra s strani nasprotnega udeleženca tudi ne predstavlja zakrivljenega ravnanja nasprotnega udeleženca, zaradi katerega bi moral nasprotni udeleženec predlagatelju povrniti stroške po krivdnem načelu. Nasprotni udeleženec je svoje ravnanje utemeljeval z razlago med pravdnima strankama spornega pogodbenega določila glede reševanja sporov med strankama, ki pa je sodišče prve stopnje ni sprejelo. Neutemeljeno upiranje nasprotnega udeleženca samo po sebi še ni zakrivljeno ravnanje.