New Facts and Evidence in the Process of Judicial Control of Arbitral Decisions

U građanskoj parnici efikasnost sudovanja postiže se, između ostalog, i zabranom iznošenja novih činjenica i dokaza, osim pod izuzetnim, zakonom propisanim uslovima. Arbitražni postupak posvećen je efikasnosti barem koliko i sudski, no u arbitražnim zakonima i konvencijama gotovo se nikada ne nalaze odredbe kojima se uređuje pitanje novota u postupcima kontrole sudskih odluka (poništaj i priznanje van zemlje porekla). Rad pokušava da sagleda moguće načine koncipiranja delovanja ograničenja beneficium novorum u takvim postupcima. Zamisliva su različita rešenja, počev od analogne primene pravila koja važe u domaćem postupku po redovnim ili vanrednim pravnim lekovima pa sve do različitih alternativnih, sui generis rešenja.Litigation strives toward efficiency by introducing inter alia restrictions on introducing new facts and evidence once the judgment has been rendered. Such new facts and evidence are impermissible, save in the presence of exceptional circumstances expressly provided in law. Arbitration proceedings are geared toward efficiency at least as much as litigation. However, legislation governing arbitration and international conventions seldom – if ever – contain rules on admissibility of new facts and evidence in the setting aside and recognition proceedings. This paper attempts to flesh out possible approaches to constraining of beneficium novorum in those proceedings. There is a number of conceivable solutions, such as analogous application of the rules applicable in the context of domestic legal remedies in civil proceedings (both ‘ordinary’ and ‘extraordinary’ remedies), alternative (sui generis) solutions, etc