Consolidation of Arbitral Proceedings: A Comparative Study under National and International Arbitration Law

Arbitration has become more complex following the spread of this method of resolving commercial and investment disputes, especially with the growth of multi-party disputes, leading to several problems, including parallel and different proceedings. Some legal systems have recognized the consolidation of arbitral proceedings to avoid the issuance of conflicting awards and thus protect the rights of multiple but relevant parties to the arbitration on the one hand, and to increase the efficiency of arbitration by reducing costs and duration of proceeding on the other hand. The consolidation, as the case may be, is contingent on satisfaction of requirements including the consent of the parties, the equality of the arbitration agreement, the uniformity of the parties and the basic legal relationship, the legal authority to issue a judicial order to consolidate, and also its desirability. Nevertheless, disadvantages of the consolidation of arbitration proceedings into the constitution of a new arbitral tribunal, namely prolongation of the proceedings and violation of confidentiality and the principle of party autonomy, have also been considered. This article, while analyzing the above issues, examines other aspects of the consolidation, such as its kinds and position in arbitration laws and regulations, obstacles to the consolidation, the governing law, and the competent authority for consolidation. Considering the lack of a specific provision under Iranian arbitration law, the consolidation of arbitrations can be sufficiently justified by the rule of wisdom and through relying upon the criterion of the combination of related court proceedings.