Arbitration - Investing into North African Solar Power - page 71

There is also the possibility to file amendments or supplements to the claim (Art.
25 of the SCC Rules/Art. 25(5) of the ICC Rules/Art. 22.1(a) of the LCIA Rules/Art.
22 of the CRCICARules/Art. 27 of the CAMRules/Art. 22 of the UNCITRALRules).
Furthermore, some arbitration rules have a special regulation concerning a
provisional timetable (Art. 23 of the SCC Rules/Art. 24(2) of the ICC Rules/Art.
17(2) of the UNCITRAL Rules). The advantage of this kind of timetable lies in the
fact that the proceeding is better structured, more efficient and foreseeable for the
parties. Art. 32(1) of the CAM Rules stipulates that the tribunal

) shall file the
final award with the Secretariat within six months from its constitution, unless
otherwise agreed by the parties in the arbitration agreement. ' The CRCICA Rules
do not have any provision concerning arbitration duration within its statutes, but
Art. 3(2) of the CRCICA Rules offers the possibility that the parties agree on a
maximum duration of the arbitration process.

( ...

'

2.2.2.5 Multi-Party Arbitration

As illustrated above, PPP projects include a lot of different actors. Within a PPP, all
contracts are individually concluded. As they are unconnected, they can develop
differently. 207 Therefore, there is a need for multi-party arbitration. 208 There are
certain requirements for multi-party arbitration. Firstly, an examination of all
necessary multi-party arbitration requirements is vital. To be able combine several
arbitration process into one proceeding, all disputing parties must agree in writ-
ing. 209 It is also possible that there is a post-dispute consent after the initiation of
proceedings. 210 However, it is hard to assume at what point such a pooling is
desired or not. 211 Furthermore, all parties must have the same chance and possibil-
ity to influence the arbitration tribunal s setup. 212

This raises the question of whether there is any benefit in combining related
disputes into multi-party arbitration. 213 There are cost benefits in cases of multi-
party arbitration. 214 Furthermore, a previous coordination can help to prevent
inconsistent or contradictory results. 215

'

In addition, there must be a solution for

207 Nicklisch ( 1994 ), 53 (54) and (55).
208 Nicklisch ( 1994 ), 53 (53).
209

Lamm et al. ( 2009 ), 54 (55-56); Nicklisch ( 1994 ), 53 (57).

210

Lamm et al. ( 2009 ), 54 (64).

211

Different arbitrational courts exclude a pooling and the fact that different contracts refer to each
other is not sufficient enough, in: Nicklisch ( 1994 ), 53 (57-58).
212

This requirement is not problematic, if the respective parties previous agreed upon a multi-
party arbitration and its setup, in: Nicklisch ( 1994 ), 53 (58); Even the French Cour de Cassation
pointed out that ability to choose an arbitrator is part of the principle of equality and thus belongs
to public policy, in: Nicklisch ( 1994 ), 53 (59).
213 Nicklisch ( 1994 ), 53 (57).
214 Lamm et al. ( 2009 ), 54 (69).
215 Lamm et al. ( 2009 ), 54 (70).