SPAIN Law and Practice Contributed by: Daniel Jiménez García, SLJ Abogados
5.2 Circumstances for Court Intervention When Courts May Intervene Judicial intervention is exceptional and deferred. Arti - cle 7 of the Arbitration Act provides that no court shall intervene in matters governed by the Act except where the Act so provides. In practice, the courts address jurisdiction in three situations: • on a declinatoria raised in parallel court proceed - ings; • in set-aside proceedings under Article 41; and • at the recognition and enforcement stage. Attitude The Spanish courts are reluctant to intervene, and increasingly so. The Constitutional Court’s line of authority, beginning with Judgment 46/2020 of 15 June 2020 and continuing through Judgments 17/2021, 55/2021 and 65/2021, and then Judg - ment 146/2024 of 2 December 2024, has repeatedly reminded the High Courts that their supervisory role is narrow and does not extend to the substance of the tribunal’s reasoning. In June 2026, the Constitutional Court sitting in plenary session went further still – see 11.3 Standard of Judicial Review . Negative Rulings A negative ruling on jurisdiction – a tribunal declining jurisdiction – is reviewable. Article 41 (1)(a) allows a set-aside application where the arbitration agreement does not exist or is invalid, and the case law accepts that an erroneous refusal of jurisdiction can be chal - lenged on that basis. In that scenario, the review is necessarily more searching than in respect of a posi - tive ruling, because there is no award on the merits to protect. 5.3 Timing of Challenge Before the Tribunal A jurisdictional objection must be raised before the tribunal at the earliest opportunity. Under Article 22 (2) of the Arbitration Act, the objection must be raised no later than the statement of defence, and an objection that the tribunal is exceeding the scope of its author - ity must be raised as soon as the matter said to be outside that scope arises. Late objections are barred unless the delay is justified.
throughout the arbitration, and prohibits any personal, professional or commercial relationship with the par - ties. A prospective arbitrator must disclose all circum - stances capable of giving rise to justifiable doubts, and the duty is continuing: fresh circumstances must be disclosed without delay as soon as they arise. Institutional and Soft Law Standards Institutional rules reinforce the statute, and CIIAM, CAM, CEA and CIMA all require a signed statement of independence and ongoing disclosure. In practice, tribunals and institutions in Spain apply the Interna - tional Bar Association (IBA) Guidelines on Conflicts of Interest in International Arbitration, as revised in 2024, as the benchmark for what should be disclosed. The Spanish Arbitration Club ( Club Español e Iberoameri- cano del Arbitraje – CEA) Code of Good Arbitration Practice is also widely followed. The 2026 ICC Rules, in force from 1 June 2026, push in the same direction by front-loading conflict-checking to the start of the case. Practical Guidance The market expectation is now firmly in favour of over- disclosure. Article 22 (1) of the Arbitration Act gives the tribu - nal power to rule on its own jurisdiction, including on objections relating to the existence or validity of the arbitration agreement, the arbitrability of the dispute and any other objection that would prevent a deci - sion on the merits. Spanish law therefore recognises competence-competence in full. Form of the Decision Under Article 22 (3), the tribunal may rule on jurisdic - tion either by way of a preliminary award or in the final award on the merits. A preliminary award upholding jurisdiction may only be challenged together with the final award through set-aside proceedings, which pre - vents the arbitration being derailed by satellite litiga - tion. 5. Jurisdiction 5.1 Challenges to Jurisdiction Competence-Competence
928 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook