SLOVENIA Law and Practice Contributed by: Vesna Cukrov and Veronika Cukrov, Law Firm Cukrov (Odvetniška družba Cukrov o.p., d.o.o.)
5.2 Circumstances for Court Intervention Under Slovenian law, courts may address issues con - cerning the jurisdiction of an arbitral tribunal in lim - ited circumstances. Courts may examine jurisdictional issues at certain stages, including when deciding on a party’s request to set aside an arbitral award or in pro - ceedings concerning the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards. Slovenian courts generally adopt a pro-arbitration and non-interventionist approach. Their role is limited to ensuring compliance with the requirements of the Arbitration Act and protecting fun - damental procedural principles, rather than reconsid - ering the merits of the arbitral tribunal’s jurisdictional decisions. Negative rulings on jurisdiction by arbitral tribunals may be subject to judicial review only within the framework provided by the Arbitration Act, primarily through proceedings concerning the setting aside of an arbitral award. Courts do not generally review such decisions at an interim stage and do not replace the arbitral tribunal’s assessment of its own jurisdiction. 5.3 Timing of Challenge Under Slovenian law, parties generally do not have the right to immediately challenge the jurisdiction of an arbitral tribunal before a court once arbitration proceedings have commenced. A party must raise an objection to the arbitral tribunal’s jurisdiction dur - ing the arbitration proceedings, generally no later than when submitting its statement of defence on the merits. If the arbitral tribunal rejects the objection and confirms its jurisdiction, the tribunal may continue with Under Slovenian law, courts generally apply a limited standard of review with respect to decisions of arbitral tribunals on questions of jurisdiction and admissibility. Judicial review is primarily exercised within the frame - work of proceedings for setting aside an arbitral award or recognition and enforcement proceedings. In such proceedings, courts examine whether the require - ments provided by the Slovenian Arbitration Act have been met, including whether a valid arbitration agree - ment existed and whether the tribunal acted within the scope of its jurisdiction. the proceedings and issue an award. 5.4 Standard of Judicial Review for Jurisdiction/Admissibility
5.5 Breach of Arbitration Agreement Under Slovenian law, national courts generally do not allow court proceedings to continue where the parties have entered into a valid arbitration agreement. Pursu - ant to the Slovenian Arbitration Act, a court seized of a dispute covered by an arbitration agreement must dismiss the action or decline jurisdiction if the defend - ant raises an objection based on the existence of the arbitration agreement in due time. Slovenian courts generally adopt a pro-arbitration approach and respect the parties’ agreement to resolve disputes through arbitration. The courts will therefore refrain from hearing the merits of a dispute where the parties have validly agreed to arbitrate, unless the arbitration agreement is found to be invalid, ineffective or incapable of being performed. Accordingly, there is a general reluctance of Slovenian courts to permit court proceedings that violate a valid arbitration agreement. Judicial intervention is limited to verifying the existence and validity of the arbitra - tion agreement rather than assessing the merits of the dispute. 5.6 Jurisdiction Over Third Parties As a general rule, Slovenian law does not permit an arbitral tribunal to assume jurisdiction over individu - als or entities that are neither parties to the arbitration agreement nor signatories to the contract containing the arbitration clause. Arbitration is based on the prin - ciple of consent, and an arbitral tribunal derives its jurisdiction exclusively from the parties’ agreement.
6. Preliminary and Interim Relief 6.1 Types of Relief
Under the Slovenian Arbitration Act, an arbitral tri - bunal may, at the request of a party, order interim measures that it considers necessary in respect of the subject matter of the dispute, unless the parties have agreed otherwise. Interim measures ordered by an arbitral tribunal are binding on the parties. They may include measures aimed at preserving the status quo, preventing imminent harm or prejudice to the arbitral proceedings, preserving assets from which a
865 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook