The court will then scrutinize the residence of the witness being challenged, his or her place of work and the relationship with the parties to a tribunal. The court has the right to make a decision regarding exclusion of the arbitrator from the tribunal or retention of the arbitrator. In addition, article 29 of ICC rules states that an award may be challenged if there are errors such as clerical, computation and any error associated with the award. This implies that if the name of the witness was included in the award, it can be corrected based on this article. The affected party will be
required to submit comments relating to the complaints within 30 days following the application. A decision can then be taken by court to correct the award to take the form that satisfies the contract between the two parties.
When comparing UNCITRAL rules and ICC rules of arbitration, I would use ICC rules of arbitration because it provides me with a particular time period that makes my application to challenge the selection of a witness valid. It also authorizes me to file an application for challenging the selection of a witness even after the award, while UNCITRAL rules do not allow me to challenge a witness after an award. …show more content…
The challenger shall then be required to notify other parties about the decision to challenge the arbitrator. When the other parties agree that the challenged arbitrator should be withdrawn from the tribunal, the challenged arbitrator has no option but to withdraw. The other difference between ICDR rules of arbitration and ICC rules or UNCITRAL rules is that in the case of ICDR rules, the challenger is required to make an application for the challenge within 15 days while in the case of UNCITRAL rules and ICC rules the challenger is required to make the application within 30 days after notification. On the other hand, the challenge to award is similar in all cases because they allow application for correction of errors to