Appointments under the International Arbitration Act 1974 (Cth)
ACICA has been prescribed by regulation, for the purposes of subsections 18(1) and 18(2) of the IAA, as the authority taken to have been specified in Article 6 of the Model Law as competent to perform the appointment functions referred to in Articles 11(3) and 11(4) of the Model Law in Australia.
Under this designation, ACICA has the power to appoint arbitrators to arbitrations seated in Australia in the circumstances outlined in Articles 11(3) and (4) of the Model Law.
Model Law provisions
The Model Law allows parties the freedom to agree on a procedure for appointing the arbitrator or arbitrators (Article 11(1)). Articles 11(3) and 11(4) of the Model Law regulate the appointment of arbitrators in certain circumstances:
- Article 11(3) applies in cases where the parties have not agreed on a procedure for appointments; and
- Article 11(4) applies in cases where, notwithstanding the existence of an agreement as to a procedure by which appointments should be made, (i) one party fails to act accordingly; (ii) it has not been possible to reach an agreement in accordance with the agreed procedure; or (iii) a third party fails to perform any function entrusted to it.
In any of the above situations, parties may apply to ACICA for an appointment, unless the parties have agreed another means of making an appointment in such circumstances.
The ACICA Appointment of Arbitrator Rules (2016) (Appointment Rules) apply to all applications received by ACICA for an appointment under the IAA. The Appointment Rules establish a streamlined process through which a party can apply to have an arbitrator appointed to a dispute seated in Australia.
A detailed outline of the appointment process under the Appointment Rules is provided here.
Please note: for cases being administered under the ACICA Arbitration Rules or ACICA Expedited Rules, parties should refer to those Rules with respect to the applicable appointment process.