ΔΙΕΘΝΗΣ ΕΜΠΟΡΙΚΗ ΔΙΑΙΤΗΣΙΑ ΚΑΙ ΕΦΑΡΜΟΓΗ ΤΩΝ ΚΑΝΟΝΩΝ ΑΝΤΑΓΩΝΙΣΜΟΥ

118 ¨ňńŇŌņő ńŋŏŎŐňŉņ ¨ňŁňŒņőňŁ ŉŁň ńŔŁŐŋŎŃņ ŒŌ ŉŁŌŎŌŌ ŁŌŒŁŃŌňőŋŎœ

ůŞ ŚŬŤ ůŤŭ

379

. őůŤ šŦŞŷŬűŴŮŤ ůŤŭ ůŢŨŦŧśŭ ťŚŮŤŭ ůūŰ ¨ŦŧŞŮůŤŬŜūŰ ŧŬŜ-

ŮŦū ŬŷŨū ŚŞŦŪŢ Ť šŦŢťũśŭ űŸŮŤ ůŤŭ ŧŬŦũŷŢũŤŭ šŦŞűūŬřŭ ŧŞŦ ū šŦŢťũśŭ

ŲŞŬŞŧůśŬŞŭ ůŤŭ ŢũůŢŸťŢũ šŦŞŦůŤŮŜŞŭ ŢůŞŪŸ ůŴũ ŢŨŢŧŷŢũŴũ ŢŬŹũ

380

ŁũŞŨūŠŦţŷŢũū ůŤ šŦŢťũś ŞŰůś šŦřŮůŞŮŤ, ůū ¨ŦŧŞŮůśŬŦū ůřŲťŤŧŢ ŰŚŬ ůŤŭ

ŞũřŠŧŤŭ ŰūŲŹŬŤŮŤŭ ůŴũ ŮůŢũŹũ ŢťũŦŧŹũ ŞũůŦŨśųŢŴũ ŢŬŜ šŢŧůŦŧŷůŤ-

ůŞŭ šŦŞŦůŤŮŜŞŭ ŚũŞũůŦ ůŤŭ ūūŮūũšŦŞŧśŭ ūŨŦůŦŧśŭ ŢŬŜ ŢŸũūŦŞŭ ůūŰ ťŢ-

ŮūŸ ůŤŭ šŦŢťũūŸŭ ŢūŬŦŧśŭ šŦŞŦůŤŮŜŞŭ ŧŞŦ ŢŬŜ ŢũŜŮŲŰŮŤŭ ůŤŭ ŢŧůŢŨŢŮůŷ-

ůŤůŞŭ ůŴũ ŮŰűŴũŦŹũ šŦŞŦůŤŮŜŞŭ ūŰ ŞũŞŧŸůūŰũ Ůůū ŢšŜū ůŤŭ šŦŢťũūŸŭ

ŮŰũŞŨŨŞŠśŭ.

3.2.3 ńŬŤũŢŰůŦŧř ūŬŜŮŞůŞ

22. ŊŷŠŴ ůŤŭ ŦšŦŞŜůŢŬŤŭ űŸŮŤŭ ŧŞŦ ŰųŤŨśŭ ŮŤŞŮŜŞŭ ůŴũ ŧŞũŷũŴũ ůūŰ

ŢŨŢŸťŢŬūŰ ŞũůŞŠŴũŦŮūŸ, Ť šŰũŞůŷůŤůŞ ŰŞŠŴŠśŭ ůūŰŭ ŮŢ šŦŞŦůŤŮŜŞ šŢũ

ŰŦūťŢůśťŤŧŢ Şŷ ůū ŁũŹůŞůū ŎūŮūũšŦŞŧŷ ¨ŦŧŞŮůśŬŦū ůŴũ ņ.ŏ.Ł. ŲŴŬŜŭ

ŢŦűŰŨřŪŢŦŭ, ŞŨŨř ŞũůŦťŚůŴŭ ŢŪŞŬůśťŤŧŢ Şŷ šŸū ŮŰŠŧŢŧŬŦŚũŢŭ ŬūŶ-

ūťŚŮŢŦŭ, ūŦ ūūŜŢŭ ŮŲŢůŜţūũůŞŦ, Ţ šŦŞűūŬŢůŦŧŷ ůŬŷū Ť ŧřťŢ ŜŞ, Ţ ůŤũ

ŚũũūŦŞ ůŤŭ šŤŷŮŦŞŭ ůřŪŤŭ. ńŦšŦŧŷůŢŬŞ, Ť ŬŹůŤ ŬūŶŷťŢŮŤ ŞűūŬř ŮůŤũ

ŰūŲŬŢŴůŦŧś, ŧŞůř ůū ¨ŦŧŞŮůśŬŦū, ŢűŞŬūŠś ůūŰ ŁŢŬŦŧŞũŦŧūŸ šŦŧŞŜūŰ

ŞũůŞŠŴũŦŮūŸ ŞŧŷŤ ŧŞŦ ŮůŤũ ŢŬŜůŴŮŤ ūŰ ůŞ ŚŬŤ ŮůŤ šŦŞŦůŤŮŜŞ ŚŲūŰũ

ŮŰűŴũśŮŢŦ ŢŜ ŮŰŠŧŢŧŬŦŚũūŰ ŢűŞŬūŮůŚūŰ ūŰŮŦŞŮůŦŧūŸ šŦŧŞŜūŰ ŮůŤ Ţ-

ůŞŪŸ ůūŰŭ šŦŞűūŬř

381

. ńũšŢŲŷŢũŤ ŞŬŞŜůŤŮŤ ůŴũ ŢŬŹũ Şŷ ůŞ šŦŧŞŦŹ-

379. ĽŴŭ ůū ŜšŦū ůū ¨ŦŧŞŮůśŬŦū ůŷũŦŮŢ: «

In Mitsubishi, we recognized that arbitral

tribunals are readily capable of handling the factual and legal complexities of

antitrust claims, notwithstanding the absence of judicial instruction and super-

vision. Likewise, we have concluded that the streamlined procedures of arbitra-

tion do not entail any consequential restriction on substantive rights. Finally, we

have indicated that there is no reason to assume at the outset that arbitrators

will not follow the law; although judicial scrutiny of arbitration awards neces-

sarily is limited, such review is sufÀcient to ensure that arbitrators comply with

the requirements of the statute

» (şŨ.

Shearson/American Express

, 482 US, ŮŢŨ.

232). ńŜŮŤŭ, «

We decline to indulge the presumption that the parties and arbi-

tral body conducting a proceeding will be unable or unwilling to retain compe-

tent, conscientious and impartial arbitrators

» (şŨ.

Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson

Lane

, 500 US, ŮŢŨ. 30, ŧŞŦ

Mitsubishi v. Soler

, 473 US, ŮŢŨ. 634).

380. ŋŢ ůŞ ŨŷŠŦŞ ůūŰ ¨ŦŧŞŮůŤŬŜūŰ: “

We conclude that concerns of international co-

mity, respect for the capacities of foreign and transnational tribunals, and sen-

sitivity to the need of the international commercial system for predictability in

the resolution of disputes require that we enforce the parties’ agreement, even

assuming that a contrary result would be forthcoming in a domestic context

”.

łŨ.

Mitsubishi v. Soler

, 473 US 614 (1985), ŮŢŨ. 629.

381. ŁŰůŷ ŮŰũŚşŞŦũŢ Ţũ ŬūŧŢŦŚũŴ, ŧŞťŹŭ Ť Mitsubishi ŧŞŦ Ť Soler ŢŜŲŞũ ŮŰűŴũś-

ŮŢŦ ũŞ ŢŦŨŰťŢŜ Ť ūŰŮŜŞ ůŤŭ ŢůŞŪŸ ůūŰŭ šŦŞűūŬřŭ ŢŜ ůŤ şřŮŢŦ ůūŰ ńŨşŢůŦŧūŸ ūŰ-

ŮŦŞŮůŦŧūŸ šŦŧŞŜūŰ.