Do you want to improve your writing? Try our new evaluation service and get detailed feedback.
Check Your Text it's free

Article 9 of the Prague Rules contains three clauses which aim to regulate the whole settlement facilitation process during the arbitration proceedings

Article 9 of the Prague Rules contains three clauses which aim to regulate the whole settlement facilitation process during the arbitration proceedings VBwo6
Article 9 of the Prague Rules contains three clauses which aim to regulate the whole settlement facilitation process during the arbitration proceedings. The wording of the article has left a considerable amount of the settlement facilitation relations unregulated and by doing so, in my opinion, the Working Group intended to maintain those ambiguities under the discretion of Arbitral Tribunal in order to increase its proactive role in dispute settlement. If we analyze each clause separately, in Article 9. 1 Prague Rules define that “unless one of the parties’ objects, the arbitral tribunal may assist the parties in reaching an amicable settlement of the dispute at any stage of the arbitration”. From the wording it is clear that the article intended to formulate general rule for the assistance of Arbitral Tribunal in settlement facilitation. However, the same article carries some harmful ambiguities which will be addressed by following paragraphs of this memorandum accompanied by respective potential practical problems caused by them. Articles 9. 2 and 9. 3 regulate, respectively, the use of mediation during the arbitration proceedings as settlement facilitation method and the procedure for the continuance of mediating arbitrator’s mandate after unsuccessful mediation process. Article 9. 2 states that “upon the prior written consent of all parties, any member of the arbitral tribunal may also act as a mediator to assist in the amicable settlement of the case” and, according to the Article 9. 3, the same arbitrator may continue to act as arbitrator only subject to further written consent from all parties if the mediation does not result in settlement. One of the main uncertainties is the reason why the Prague Rules have defined “prior written consent of all parties” requirement for mediation on the one hand, while confining itself to the “unless one of the parties’ objects” criteria for other facilitation methods under Article 9. 1 on the other hand. The potential problematic issues arising out of Articles 9. 2 and 9. 3 are mostly related to reducing the efficiency of arbitral proceedings and endangering the enforceability of the final arbitral award, especially by not regulating the conflict between the main principles of arbitration and mediation methods.
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
Article
9 of the Prague
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
Rules
contains three clauses which aim to regulate the whole
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
settlement
facilitation process during the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
arbitration
proceedings. The wording of the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
article
has
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
left
a considerable amount of the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
settlement
facilitation relations unregulated and by doing
This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:
so
, in my opinion, the Working Group intended to maintain those ambiguities under the discretion of
Possible spelling mistake found.
Arbitral
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
Tribunal
in order to increase its proactive role in dispute settlement.

If we analyze each clause
separately
, in
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
Article
9. 1 Prague
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
Rules
define that “unless one of the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
parties’
objects, the
Possible spelling mistake found.
arbitral
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
tribunal
may assist the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
parties
in reaching an amicable
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
settlement
of the dispute at any stage of the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
arbitration”
. From the wording it is
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
clear
that the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
article
intended to formulate general
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
rule
for the assistance of
Possible spelling mistake found.
Arbitral
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
Tribunal
in
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
settlement
facilitation.
However
, the same
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
article
carries
This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:
some
harmful ambiguities which will
be addressed
by following paragraphs of this memorandum accompanied by respective potential practical problems caused by them.

Articles 9. 2 and 9. 3 regulate,
respectively
, the
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
use
of
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
mediation
during the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
arbitration
proceedings as
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
settlement
facilitation method and the procedure for the continuance of mediating arbitrator’s mandate after unsuccessful
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
mediation
process.
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
Article
9. 2 states that “upon the prior written consent of all
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
parties
, any member of the
Possible spelling mistake found.
arbitral
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
tribunal
may
also
act as a mediator to assist in the amicable
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
settlement
of the case” and, according to the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
Article
9. 3, the same arbitrator may continue to act as arbitrator
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
only
subject to
further
written consent from all
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
parties
if the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
mediation
does not result in
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
settlement
. One of the main uncertainties is the reason why the Prague
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
Rules
have defined “prior written consent of all
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
parties”
requirement for
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
mediation
on the one hand, while confining itself to the “unless one of the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
parties’
objects” criteria for other facilitation methods under
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
Article
9. 1
on the other hand
. The potential problematic issues arising out of
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
Articles
9. 2 and 9. 3 are
mostly
related to reducing the efficiency of
Possible spelling mistake found.
arbitral
proceedings and endangering the
Possible spelling mistake found.
enforceability
of the final
Possible spelling mistake found.
arbitral
award,
especially
by not regulating the conflict between the main principles of
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
arbitration
and
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
mediation
methods.
What do you think?
  • This is funny writingFunny
  • I love this writingLove
  • This writing has blown my mindWow
  • It made me angryAngry
  • It made me sadSad

IELTS essay Article 9 of the Prague Rules contains three clauses which aim to regulate the whole settlement facilitation process during the arbitration proceedings

Essay
  American English
3 paragraphs
359 words
5.5
Overall Band Score
Coherence and Cohesion: 5.5
  • Structure your answers in logical paragraphs
  • ?
    One main idea per paragraph
  • Include an introduction and conclusion
  • Support main points with an explanation and then an example
  • Use cohesive linking words accurately and appropriately
  • Vary your linking phrases using synonyms
Lexical Resource: 5.0
  • Try to vary your vocabulary using accurate synonyms
  • Use less common question specific words that accurately convey meaning
  • Check your work for spelling and word formation mistakes
Grammatical Range: 6.5
  • Use a variety of complex and simple sentences
  • Check your writing for errors
Task Achievement: 5.0
  • Answer all parts of the question
  • ?
    Present relevant ideas
  • Fully explain these ideas
  • Support ideas with relevant, specific examples
Labels Descriptions
  • ?
    Currently is not available
  • Meet the criteria
  • Doesn't meet the criteria
Recent posts





Get more results for topic:
  • Article 9 of the Prague Rules contains three clauses which aim to regulate the whole settlement facilitation process during the arbitration proceedings