DOMESTIC ARBITRATION

BRIEF SUMMARY(40:00)

DOMESTIC ARBITRATION
- Covers both commercial and non-commercial
- Due process- it is important that there is an opportunity to be heard because that’s the
only time that you can satisfy the requirement of due process
- For the venue, the place is to be decided by the parties; or in Manila by default; or if the
arbitral tribunal is to choose, where convenient for both parties.
- For the LANGUAGE, it should be in english r if not, it should be translated in English
(Discussion of IBAY)
- In terms of confidentiality, whatever is discussed in the arbitration or in the arbitral
agreement, see to it that it is confidential. Not to broadcast or open to persons that is not
a party to the agreement so the client can be sure that it is all confidential.
- In rules on Receipt, there is a rule that the other party must receive the documents.
- And she also discussed the addresses where the documents may be sent.
- Electronic messaging or informing the other party is also accepted especially now that
we are experiencing pandemic.
- Waiver of objection-within 30 days, if there is no response, it is deemed that you waive
your dispute rights
- Extent of Court-the Court has also jurisdiction in domestic arbitration in several cases.
So if the arbitrator was found to have committed misconduct or miscalculation of
awarding, the court may now interpose considering those grounds
- (Mr. Cariaso)
- In Domestic Arbitration, one can represent himself. Normally, in court, we usually ask for
assistance from a counsel. But in domestic arbitration, you can freely represent yourself
or you may also ask for assistance from a counsel.
- In arbitration agreement, it is considered as a contract. It must comply with the
requirements of contract.
- Determination of Rules- the parties can decide which rules that will be applied in their
domestic arbitration. The rules are discretion of the parties. They can fully decide on that
- COMMENCEMENT OF THE PROCEEDINGS-It shall be commenced with the prior
arbitration. So if there is none, it will be decided by the parties and of course it will
commence the moment the other party receives the dispute.

(Atty. V)
I also want to point out that the rule that primarily governs the Domestic arbitration is actually
the agreement of the parties. Yung mga laws yung sa arbitration law, ung sa ADR Act, these
are actually just suppletory. I would like to emphasize this because usually the automatic
answer is what governs ganyan yung law on domestic arbitration, automatic is the Arbitration
law or ADR act. This is not the case because the law that governs is the agreement between
the parties. It’s the arbitration contract. So when the parties enter into any part of contract or
consensual undertaking and there is an inclusion there that in case they will have a dispute, the
rules ng ganito ganiyan will govern. In the event of disagreement between the parties or in the
event of conflict, the parties shall subject themselves to arbitration which shall be governed by
rules to be agreed upon by the parties. So if the parties said so,and then they annexed or
included in their agreement, na ganito ung rules na mag-gogovern sa kanila in case of any
dispute, then un ung mag-gogovern muna before mag-gogovern yung ADR act or arbitration
law. And if their agreement is silent on certain parts yung kanilang set of rules, ang
maggogovern na is yung sa ADR law or arbitration law. So number 1 na masusunod is of
course the agreement between the parties or the rules as imposed by the parties among
themselves in case na kulang ung rules then that’s the time na magiging suppletory ung ating
arbitration law and ADR act. And if they are governed by other laws, dun na rin mag-fofollow
ung iba.

QUESTION AND ANSWER

1. Ben-Since the reporters discussed or covered the confidentiality matters in the
arbitration process, May I just ask if the arbitrators are immune from liability?
Janelle- Liability in case of breach of privacy po ba yung tanong?
Ben- Yes it can be, for example the confidentiality matters in relation to confidentiality.
○ Ezia- They should be liable kasi nga sabi ng ADR act na confidential ung mga
arbitration proceedings and it… (mej nacut recording ko ata.) Kung kelan lang
hindi siya magiging confidential.--If merong consent of the parties and for the
limited purpose of ..
○ Atty. Vee- you sure? I mean if the arbitrator is liable, on what ground? Is there a
law punishing the arbitrator?
○ Janelle- atty, hindi po ba mag-fafall un sa breach of privacy? Para pong ung
attorney privilege so parang ganun po ung magiging ethics ng arbitrator. Kasi
parang nabanggit po ni kezia earlier na mag-iintervene na yung court kapag may
misconduct na yung arbitrator. So I think that will fall there.
○ Atty. Vee- Yes.
○ Janelle- so ang pagchichismis ng something confidential is a misconduct so it will
be intervened by the court which will answer the question of sir ben na they will
be liable since they are bounded by laws eh so it is protected. So any breach of
that ay may kakarapatang kaparusahan.
○ Atty. Vee-- Yes. and that is how you answer bar questions.
2. When is a party not estopped from raising the objection of noncompliance?
○ Ezia- when the party knows of such noncompliance and intentionally waived it,
he is estopped.
○ Atty. Vee- I also agree. Kasi parang.. I mean the event when estoppel sets in,
that’s when kapag wala na ung ano eh.. Kapag it’s no longer time to object. The
period has lapsed already. And there was no action from the party the moment
na nalaman niya ung noncompliance right? So okay. Tama ba?
○ Ezia- Hindi nila alam ung noncompliance tas sinabi lang nila na waiver of
objection yan. Well, it is not estopped po.
○ Atty. - Yes. before all other events set in like- it’s no longer time, you are no
longer allowed to question that noncompliance or to object for non-compliance,
 then that’s the time that.. Hindi ganito na lang. The period that you are not
allowed anymore, the period before that, that’s the time that you are not
estopped. Kasi you are asking “when is a party not estopped?”
3. May parties not bound to an arbitration agreement be included in the arbitration?
○ Cariaso- in the case of the Ormoc Sugarcane Planters Association v. CA, it was
held that the petitioner which is the (OSPA) is already a stranger to the contract
since he was not directly associated under such contract. And the parties in that
contract are the parties are the deemed parties in interest in an action of
appeal? So if he is not a party in the contract hindi po siya magiging party in any
arbitration demand or agreement.
○ Atty. Vee- hind siya bound doon sa arbitraion and hindi siya pwedeng basta
basta isali kasi hindi naman siya party to the contract. Wala siyang pakialam in
other words.
○ Janelle- remember the requisites of valid arbitral agreement, it should fall
sa requisites ng contracts. So sa contracts, merong cause doon. Bakit tayo
maglalagay ng third party kung wala siyang cause of action. So parang
redundant siya doon. And we will go back again to the doctrine of
confidentiality. Pag may ininvolve tayo sa arbitral agreement na wala nama
siyang concern doon, she should be out of the picture. So the answer is
NO.
○ Atty. Vee- and that is correct also consent, object, cause. Kung walang consent,
wala siya doon sa contract.
4. In a dispute where one of the parties is incapcitated, when is such dispute capable of
referral to arbitration.
○ Atty. V- kelan ung incapacity?Was it on the inception of the contract or during the
life of the contract. Tapos before the dispute or after the dispute?
○ Cj- during po and at the inception Atty.
○ Atty.- Incapacitated siya to enter into the contract pero nag-enter pa in siya.
○ Cj- in a case where a party is incapacitated to enter int that particular agreemnt o
contract, when is that agreement?...When is that controversy subject to being
referred to arbitration kapag incapacitated ung party?
○ Cariaso- Well under the arbitration agreement kasi the submission and contract
shall be valid, enforceable and irrevocable except upon grounds provided by law
for the revocation of contract. Basically, it will be under the Court’s jurisdiction na
under the case.
○ Atty. Ve- I agree with the answer. The reason why I asked din if the incapacity
existed kelan? Nung pumasok na ba siya sa contract or nung nandoon na ung
contract and then nagkaroon ng dispute? Kasi magkaibang bagay un
i. If there is capacity to enter the contract tapos the incapacity set in tapos
nagkaroon ng incapacity during the dispute. That will be something that is
governed na ng arbitration.
ii. If the incapacity set in noong time ng inception ng contract, then the
aggrieved party may as well move for the severance of the
relationship between them kasi there is no contract in the first place. So
 ang i-aatack mo na dun is the validity of the contract itself. Kasi if you
attack the validity of the contract itself, then it’s gone. You immediately
resolved the same as court na. But when t comes to stipulations, tapos
nagkaroon ng incapacity, tapos nagkaroon siguro ng breach and
everything, of course you will go to arbitration and then paano ung
arbitration kapag ganoon? Things will get complicated na rin so.. I mean if
the incapacity set in naman during the dispute, problems will of course
arise. So this person needs representation, what if there is a stipulation
that thy will not enter into stipulation ganyan.. questions will of course
arise in case magkakaroon ng ADR.
○ Janelle- dagdag ko lang po Atty, dun sa question niya parang di ba one of the
parties is incapacitated. So ung latter question niyo., when is such dispute
capable of referral to arbitration. It will only be capable to arbitration if there is
already a legal guardian that will represent the incapacitated. Kasi it will still be
bounded by the law on contracts. So kapag nagproceed si incapacitated sa
arbitral agreement, incapacitated siya so the contract will be void. So hindi na
siya ipprocess ni arbitrator kasi alam na niyang incaacitated si other party. So it
only be referred and entertained by the arbitrator kapag merong representing
individual in behalf of the incapacitated.
○ Atty. V- and then that will also bring us to the separability of ADR or of
Arbitration. So kapag ung contract can be deemed void because of incapacity of
a certain party, pero meron nang definite rules when it comes to arbitration na
it’s no longer subject to arbitration, whatever will be agreed upon by the parties,
doon na rin papasok ung doctrine of separability of arbitration proceedings or the
clause of arbitration, kasi pwede din na you can also challenge that contract
before an arbitration court. So it all still depends on that clause. Kasi you can
craft a certain contract. Sasabihin mo na in case of breach or disputes,
automatically, sa arbitration siya. Pero in case na hindi na valid ung contract, you
can actually bring that to court. But if there is a stipulation there na in case invalid
yung contract, you still will submit it to arbitration, then it can still be respected.
So it still depends when the incapacity took place. It depends on your arbitration
clause if stipulated. Still the question remains, how can you enter ito that
arbitration clause kasi incapacitated ka naman? So let’s just go to court. Kasjay
kapag nangyari ung incapacity nung nag-enter kasa contract na iyon.
○ Ezia- Atty, baka po may referral po ng guardian?
○ Atty- pwede if the incapacity occurred after the inception na. During the life of the
contract na. Hindi noong first na at the time you entered into the contract.
5. Can a party invoke the incapacity of the party when said party knowingly entered
into an agreement with incapacitated party? For example si A, 15 y.o. tapos si B 25.
Nagkaroon sila ng arbitral agreement tapos nag-agree na sila eh. Nagkaroon na ng
contract. Settled na sila. Pero after several time, narealize ni A na minor siya nung time
na nagkaroon ng arbitral agreement, ayaw niya ngayon ibigay yung ganito kasi iniinvoke
niyana incapacitated siya nung nag-enter sila sa arbitral agreement. So ang tanong is-
pwede bang i-invoke ni minor/incapacitated party na incapacitated siya pero alam
naman nung other party na incapacitated siya nungpirmahan.
○ Atty- B knows that A is incapacitated but still entered into an arbitration
agreement. And then now A says that this agreement cannot be had because of
the incapacitaty?
○ Janelle- sa question kasi ni Ms. Gumangan, kung kelan pwedeng irefer, so sabi
natin kanina, hindi nga pwedeng irefer kasi nga incapacitated siya. So for
example in another scenario, naproceed nga ung agreement pero incapacitated
si A pero alam naman nila pareho na incapacitated sila so ngayon ung question
niya is pwede bang i-invoke ni incapacitated na hindi valid ung agreement natin
kasi minor ako at that time. ANSWER- yes? Kasi being incapacitated person..
kaya ka nga incaacitated eh. Hindi ka capable na magdecide for yourself. So any
decision na mag-arive from an incapable person is hindi nirerecognize ng court.
Remember namention kanina ni Atty, in terms of arbitration, what prevails is the
agreement of the parties. But the court will intervene in a suppletory manner if
the contract is defective. So the arbitral agreement is defective because a party
is incapacitated. So in that case, papasok na ug ADR law which is pwede na
nilang pakialaman itong contract na ito kasi nga in the first place voidable siya so
kahit na sabihin niya na.. at that point inuto niya lang ung 15 y.o. “Oh bibigyan
kita ng ice cream pirmahan mo to.” Alam naman ni incapacitated na hindi siya
capable kasi nga may ice cream. So kahit na alam niya un, hindi niya pwedeng
gamitin sa court. Hindi niya pwedeng i-invoke un.. kahit na sabihin niya na “ alam
naman niya eh.bakit niya i-iinvoke un?” Kasi nga hindi recognizable ung desisyon
niya kasi nga hindi naman siya capacitated.
○ Atty.- pero kapag sa question na to, we go back to the recission of contracts no?
○ Ezia- sa Section 2 of Arbitration law, what were a person capable of entering into
a submission or contracthas knowingly entered into the same with a person
incapable of so doing, the objection on the ground of incapacity can be taken
only in behalf of the person so incapacitated. So yung person na hindi
incapacitated, hindi pwedeng mag-object if he knows his incapacity.
○ Atty- and if you look into it din in equity purpopses. Parang ginamit mo ung
incapacity niya to enter nto that contract tapos ikaw ung naging aggrieved party
you also use that same incapacity? I mean you already knew that that person is
incapacitated and you submitted yourself. And now that you are aggrieved, so
you use the same incapacity to feel better of the situation. Not legal but practical
application lang you knew fully well that that person was incapacitated. And yet
you still entered into a contract with that perso. And now, you become the
aggrieved party. So now you are going o use that same incapacity to save
yourself? Hindi ba parang meron nang waiver na on you part knowing fully well
what it can do to you. Tapos ikaw ung natalo. So if the incapacity is already
knwn, well the contract should not have entered into. It should have been
rescinded. Pero wala eh hindi mo pinarescind. Now we go legally, of course, you
cannot claim anymore whatever you can claim because you knew. The contract
was already devod of its one of its primary elements which is consent. A person
 who cannot give consent is there, but still you entered into a contract, wala ah.
Whatever losses you suffered, you suffered it on your own. So can a person
invoke the incapacity? No. No more. It’s your fault.
6. Do you think the court intervention on issues regarding the appointing authoriy and the
conduct of arbitrators affect the speedy disposition of teh case consdering that one of
the golas of ADR is speedy disposition of the case? Why or why not?
○ Ezia- sa extent ng court intervention yan no? We said that no court shall
intervene unless in the intances allowed by arbitration law or ADR act.. question-
will it affect the speedy disposition? Yes it will affect. But wil it violate? I don’’t
think so kasi ung pag-intervene ng court ay pursuant sa ADR act or special ADR
rules.
○ Atty- ung sa intervention naman ng court, sinabi naman nila kanina and these are
the instances na talagang necessary that the court will intervene. Well it can
affect. Of course matagal ung disposition ng court. Ilang months din. Depende sa
ka-busy ng mga court. Again, it will definitely affect the speedy disposition of the
case but still we should recognize that some functions that are well within the
province of the cour. Kaya we should always follow the rules.
7. What are the matters that can be included in the interim measures of protection?
○ Ezia- Interim measures- inorder to safeguard the rights of a Party had there been
a dispute. So feeling nila sa arbitration ung rights nila ay injured, they could ask
the court to order for the safeguard of the.. list?
8. In the Ormoc Sgar planters case, can A, a party not a party not bound in the
contract,sue on behalf of B those who are parties to the said contract because the
former are the recognized representatives of the latter? Clarification- recognized
representatives in the contract? Stated on teh contract?
○ Cj- in the case, the association here is claiming that they are the recognized
representatives. So is it enough or is it suffcient that they could already sue or
claim fo arbitration agreement because they are the representatives of the
planters in that case.
○ Yes. Basically kasi what actually happened in the case is actually governed by a
milling contract in between the milling company and the planters. Na ang contract
nila is supposed to be 34% goes to the sugar centrals, 65% goes to the individual
planters and 1% to the association in which that planter belongs to. Pero ang
hindi kasi namention is if that 1%. For example hindi member ung isang planter
in any associations, san mapupunta ung 1%? Supposed to be it wll be given to
the sugar centrals. But the sugar centrals deemed it na ibigay na lang sa mga
sugar centrals ung 1% na hindi part ng any association. Kaya iyon ang naging
issues nila doon kaya un ang naging cause ni ormoc sugar planters to file a suit
against the milling companies. Now the SC held that the petitioner- Ormoc Sugar
planters has no legal capacity to do so kasi nga in this particular case, they are
not the proper party. Basically the association itself is a stranger to the contract.
So the parties are supposed to be the real parties in interest lang. so kumbaga
kung gustong ibigay yun 1% sa individual pplanters, wala silang pakialam doon.
○ Atty- parang ung pour autrui di ba?
 ○ CJ- so since nabanggit po ni Atty ung pour autrui(stipulation against a third-
person), is it applicable in that particular case sir Romeo?
○ If there is stipulation that the assoc can be made as a representative for them,
then possibly. It could be. Under their contract kasi no eh. It was not stipulated
there.
9. Atty- di ba sa first part kasi you discussed about venue diba. What if this venue as
agreed upon in the arbitration contract, is it fatal in the arbitration proceedings? For
example, SFC tapos parang bigla silang lumipat sa Laoag City Ilocos Norte.
○ Janelle-If lumipat po sila sa Laoag pero mutually agreed upon,I think it’s okay.
Pero kawawa naman po kung hindi consented kung ung isa nasa SFC, ung isa
nasa Laoag.
○ Pareho silang nasa SFC pero lumipat ila sa Laoag. Pero basta lumipat lang sila
sa Laoag and then the proceedings went on and tehn the aggrieved party raised
venue as its one of its grounds to question the arbitral awar?
○ Ang magpprevail pa rin po is ungplace designated. Ung ano po ung sinabi. So
Yes po fatal siya in a way. Kasi if it is stipulated, it should be followed. So sudden
changes in the arbitration na hindi stipulated already violates the contract.
○ Atty- yes pwede. Pwede niya actually iquestion yung venue pero generallly if
venue has been changed and then nobody questioned it, and then they still went
on in the case, of course the other party who is aggrieved is now estopped from
questioning the venue. BUT if this aggrieved party is proved that this has been a
serious reason that resulted in grave prejudice to such party, then this can be
overthrown by the court. Or can be questioned before the court. So hindi siya
automatic ah na hindi nasunod ung venue, pwede siyang ground. Let’s take note
na pwedeng ma-estop ung other party lalo na if there was no proof that there has
been grave prejudice on his part sa pag-conduct ng proceedings. So it’s not
automatic. It has to be justified.
○ Janelle- baka kasi pag nag-laoag sila, mas kilala niya ung Mayor doon, so it’s
prejudicial t theother.
○ Atty- yes. But GRAVELY prejudiced siya sa arbitral award kaya kinuquestion niya
ung venue. Iyon.
10. Atty- dun sa extent of court, dun sa extent of the power of the court or the discretion of
the court to question ung mga naging proceedings. I mean sa arbitral award mismo, are
legal questions also included here?
○ Cariaso-I suppose atty,yes.
○ Atty. you sure? Okay legal questions CAN be INCLUDED but they must be ano
ha.. let’s try to understand also na just because legal questions or the application
of the law is what is ivolved, it already means na pwede nang mag-intervene
yung court. Because sometimes, how the arbitrators decided the matter based
on the contract of these parties. Tapos parang equitable naman siya and it
seems na wala namang unjust na nagyari, it can be ACCEPTABLE actually. Kasi
the arbitrators have been given enough discretion in interpreting these matters
doon sa relationship between the parties. So sometimes, even if there is a legal
questions, still the arbitral award can still hold kasi the Courts will always respect
 kung ano ung naging interpretations nitong arbitratrs doon sa case. So we will
always understand na these arbitrators acted within their expertise. So legal
questions may be had but of course the court will always respect yung expertise
nung arbitrators on the matter. So it’s not always the case na kapag may kapag
may legal question, may wrong interpretation of the law, our legal defintions or
our legal interpretations of the thing should stand. Take note that the courts will
always take into consideration the expertise of these arbitrators. Sometimes
factual queestions din ung pwede ring itanong sa courts. Like if the other party is
so aggrieved doon sa decision in such a way na hindi mo talaga makikita ung
pagiging just nung arbitrators, that can also be questioned of course before the
courts. Hindi dahil legal ung question, automatic iffavor ka na ng court. They will
still be considering the power of the abitrators whose discretion were taken into
consideration in the given circumstances.

DOMESTIC ARBITRATION

Since we have established that the will of the parties is the paramount consideration when it
comes to arbitration, what if the parties have agreed that one party will have 2 arbitrators and
then the other party will have 3 arbitrators, will these be possible?

- despite the rule that the procedure can be stipulated by the parties, on choosing the
number of arbitrators in the proceedings it is actually void because it will be an
opportunity for one party to take advantage of the other; bias.

How about if the other party is not similarly situated from the other? One party is economically
unfortunate from the other? Is it possible for them to make an agreement that the other have 3
the other have 2 arbitrators?

- NO. Despite their agreement it is still invalid. Beause that is not allowed under the
arbitration law. IRR article 5.10 (j) Any stipulation na mas marami yung arbitrator nung
isang party from the other is considered void. Even if you have agreement if it is against
law, morals, good customs, public order, public policy it cannot be.

What if the parties knew that the arbitrators are not qualified but they still pursue the arbitration?
What is the effect of that?

- Non-possession of the qualification of an arbitrator is a ground for a challenge of the

appointment of that arbitrator. Here, since the arbitration proceedings proceeded depite
the knowledge of the party of the non qualification of the arbitrator, the party is already
estop from challenging the appointment of the arbitrator, then the arbitration will proceed
and any arbitrators not qualified should still participate in the proceedings.

Elements of Self determination: these are important concept when resolving disputes and when
it comes to deciding what mode fits the situation that you entered into.

When will the notice for motion to vacate, modify or correct an award be served from the
adverse party?

- serve to the adverse party within 30 days after the award is filed or delivered.

May the tribunal at their own initiative make additional awards for those claims omitted in the
awards?

- Under the IRR, the tribunal cannot. Because under such provision only those instances
under par. A such as typographical error and other similar errors can be changed motu
proprio by the arbitral tribunal. But those additional awards under par. C or those claims
presented during the proceedings but only the linda? awards may be requested by the
parties claiming the same
- ATTY: They cannot act beyond what is being asked by these parties.

OTHER FORMS OF ARBITRATION

Inominate – it doesn’t have a name; the parties could just agree on what to do with their
problems and disputes, they will try to resolve the same as they deem fit

When it comes to domestic arbitration and other forms of arbitration, it really takes into
consideration primarily the agreement between the parties. Because it is the will of the parties to
enter into a relationship or to enter into whatever vinculum that connects them. Now they are
having a dispute, it is up to them to settle whatever it needs to be settled. Pinasok ko to, kaya
nagkakagulo kayo, so try muna natin ayusin base dun sa anong gusto natin doon sa terms natin
bago natin siya ipunta doon sa court which has a process that is foreign to the relationship that
we try to forge or try to wield.

What is the difference of mini trial and mediation? Why do you think there are other forms of
ADR?

- In both mini trial and mediation they actually includes the summarized version of the
case of the parties; the decision of the mediators and the panel are not binding and both
parties may end at an impast?

For the difference, in the mediation process, the mediator is actually a neutral party which
does not take the side of any of the parties. But in the mini trial, the members of the panel
are actually advocates of each party because they are actually members of a particular
party. Unless, the parties in the minitrial agree that there will be third person to
intervene.?

- The declaration of policy in the IRR reiterated that self determination/self autonomy.
Kaya nga siya sinabi na alternative, there are some choices/ options na pwedeng
pagpilian ng mga parties dun lalabas yung importance ng self determination or the
principle of autonomy na actually embeded in our constitution. So the purpose is to
provide the parties an arsenal of choices or alternative in resolving their dispute.

What if the claimant fails to appear to the hearing to communicate his claim? What is the
consequence? Does the concept of default applies here?

- This is actually under the topic of default of a party and in this case if the claimant fails to
communicate his claim the consequence is the arbitral tribunal will already terminate the
proceeding.
- ATTY: This also depends if it can be interpreted as a refusal of the party to have the issue
settled. Non-attendance could also be deliberate or not deliberate
- IRR mentioned that it depends kung saan nagtuturo yung ADR form, if it is akin to
arbitration, then rule on arbitration will govern, then if it is for mediation, the rule of
mediation will govern.
- Tantamount to refusal of the party to proceed, gamitin natin yung provisions sa
arbitration, kasi wala talaga specific provisions sa mini trial, for early neutral evaluation,
inominate and other forms of ADR when it comes to those provision, so the answer will
come from the other provisions dun sa mediation and arbitration depende kung saan
pinaka malapit yung process
- ATTY: and if the the disputes have already been submitted before the arbitration tribunal
 or other forms of ADR they can actually submitted for the disposition of the tribunal or
the arbitrator, the only thing left for the arbitrator to do is to review the matter on his own
with the pieces of evidence submitted by the party who are still trying to pursue the case.
From this pieces of evidence the arbitrator shall be deciding. It will be like judgement on
the pleadings. It will not automatically award or grant whatever can be granted to the
party pursuing the case in case of default of the other party. Of course, the matter will
still be decided based on what is presented by the parties who is there to pursue the case.
Especially, if there has been an agreement to submit the same before an arbitration
tribunal or whatnot dun nalang din magdedecide kasi it has already been agreed upon by
the parties na doon isesettle in case na magkakaroon ng dispute. Now if hindi mag
cocommunicate ng claim yung isa, then it has already been submitted to the discretion of
the court that is deciding the matter.

Can you exhaust all form of ADR available?

- YES as long as the parties agree to have another form of ADR to settle their disputes
because again the paramount of ADR is the agreement of the parties, so if the parties
again agree to have another form of ADR to settle their disputes they can do so.
- ATTY: some contracts indicate that they shall exhaust all forms of ADR before they can
proceed to trial. You can actually enumerate all form of ADR you like in a contract
before you proceed to court in case any dispute arise from the parties. Pwede kahit itry ng
both party ang lahat ng ADR na gusto nila as condition precedent when they submit to
the autorithy of the courts.

If the dispute is already in the court may a party before and during the pre trial file a motion to
refer the parties to other ADR forms? What if wala parin sila agreement tapos na file parin sa
court na may isa pang ADR form permitted ba sila na file parin ng motion or hindi na?

- Yes under IRR. Kahit na nasa court na siya, either of the parties may, before and during
the pre trial file a motion to the courts to refer the parties to any other ADR forms.
- ATTY: Yes, if the matter can still be settled by the parties thru ADR basta hindi pa
nangyayari yung pre trial they can still be refered for ADR sanctioned by the court.
- Yes pwede parin, it is a settled rule that even after pretrial any of the parties may jointly
move for the dismissal of the proceedings in the court because that is pursuant to ART
2030 of the civil code, na kahit anong civil proceeding pwede siya isuspend depending on
the wilingness of the parties for a possible compromise.
- ATTY: and it is always the priority of the court to settle the matters and decklog court
dockets. So if there is still some way to have the parties settle the case other than
judicially they will let the parties do so if it is for the end of litigation.

SPECIAL RULES OF COURT ON ADR

When are these rules NOT summary in nature?

• Confirmation, correction or vacation of award in domestic arbitration;

• Recognition and enforcement or setting-aside of an award in ICA;

 • Recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral award;

Why is it in these three instances the proceedings are no longer summary?

When does an arbitrator become de jure unable to perform his functions or de facto unable to
perform his functions?

What is the difference between a de jure and de facto inability of these arbitrators?

When is the arbitral tribunal constituted?

CONSTRUCTION DISPUTE AND ARBITRATION

ADR- Construction arbitration

How are rules interpreted in construction dispute? Liberal or strict?

● Generally it’s strict adherence to the rules po. It’s based on Section 13.2 of the IRR. Ito
yung sinasabi ng mga arbitral tribunals sa briefing part.
● Atty- and it’s highly technical right? Okay. Kasi you cannot be too liberal when it comes
to construction disputes. Being liberal can be dangerous din doon sa construction and
wala eh. All of these things can be computed. Diba nga kapag may construction contract
or infrastructure development contracts, kapag may mga notice of awards, may mga
number of days pa kung kelan dapat tapusin. And they really study these technical
specifications from its first phase up to its completion kaya you cannot really do away
with all these technicalities.
Does the court have the power to set aside an arbitration award on the ground that there are
errors of fact or law? (Sa implementation of the award by the arbitral tribunal.)
● Ben- On the part of errors of facts, I don’t think so. But the commission of errors of law,
yes as what chasteen stated a while ago in filing the appeal.
● Chasteen- yes. So those are the modes of review. Yung errors on facts of law, so it’s
possible.
● Atty- is it?
● Ben- okay. Vacation of Award-a party to a domestic arbitration may question the arbitral
award with the appropriate RTC means if there is a question of fact/law, the process is to
appeal. So it can be vacated by the RTC?
● Charizza- hindi po pwedeng i-set aside yung decision ng tribunal. The court cannot
vacate the award of the arbitration tribunal.
● Atty- while it is appealable, or while there are remedies when it comes to the
implementation of the awards rendered by arbitral tribunals, the court really cannot touch
the issues when it comes to questions or errors of fact because when it comes to errors
of facts, these has already been decided with the expertise of the tribunal that has been
assigned to such ADR. What can be modified now would be errors in law- lack of
jurisdiction, violation of certain laws that may not have been or the application of matters
that are not inconsistent with the law. Also the SC can actually rule/modify these certain
 objections if a party can be gravely affected or if their is grave injustice in the ruling of
this arbitral tribunal, then the SC can look into this issue and render a judgement that is
different from what has been ruled by the arbitral tribunal.
● Yes, there can be reedies. It has the power to vacate or set aside any arbitral award or
ruling but this power also has limitations because of course kapag pwede naman palang
baguhin ng court ung decision ng arbitral tribunal, then what’s the point of having an
arbitral tribunal diba? It can just be a cause of delays, pang red tape lang pala para
maiwasan ang immediate implementation of certain rules.