Emergency arbitration: theoretical foundations and procedural framework in Peruvian institutional arbitration rules

Abstract

Emergency arbitration is consolidated in international commercial arbitration practice. In the Peruvian legal system, given the absence of comprehensive legislative development, arbitral institutions have driven the development of this mechanism through special provisions in their rules. This article analyzes its theoretical foundations and procedural framework based on a representative sample of Peruvian institutional arbitration rules. First, it posits that emergency arbitration is an authentic modality of arbitration. Next, adopting a problem-oriented and systematic approach, three procedural issues of this institution are analyzed: (i) the conflict between extreme urgency and the right to be heard; (ii) the models for challenging emergency decisions; and (iii) the plurality of models for procedural gap-filling. The article concludes by showing that current institutional designs face structural challenges, which require a creative and systematic vision from the arbitral community.