PRIZNANJE I IZVRŠENJE ODLUKA BLOKČEJN ARBITRAŽA PREMA NJUJORŠKOJ KONVENCIJI
Abstract
Blokčejn tehnologija utiče na brojne industrije i oblasti, ne zaobilazeći ni arbitražno pravo. Porast platformi koje nude „blokčejn arbitražu“ nagoveštava pomak ka bržem, jeftinijem i decentralizovanom rešavanju sporova. Kao glavna prednost ističe se mogućnost samostalnog izvršenja odluka putem pametnih ugovora. Ipak, budući da je to samo mogućnost, veliki broj odluka biće izvršen tradicionalnim putem. Sporovi koji se rešavaju blokčejn arbitražama su po prirodi globalni, te je potrebno obezbediti prekogranično dejstvo njihovih odluka. Ovaj rad istražuje da li se odluke blokčejn arbitraža mogu smatrati odlukama podobnim za priznanje prema Njujorškoj konvenciji i da li proces njihovog donošenja zadovoljava uslove za priznanje iz Konvencije. Autor u radu prepoznaje da procesni aspekt javnog poretka država priznanja može da bude narušen načinom na koji se donose odluke u blokčejn arbitražama, što je osnov za odbijanje priznanja i izvršenja od strane sudova po službenoj dužnosti.
References
Bibliography
Ali, S., Neuhaus, S. K., The Emergence of Soft Law as an Applicable Source of Procedural and Substantive Law, in: Kröll, S., Bjorklund, A. K., Ferrari, F., (eds.), 2023, Cambridge Compendium of International Commercial and Investment Arbitration, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp. 537–562.
Álvarez, O. P., Vidal, O. V., Vallespinós, L. D., 2022, Unlocking Blockchain Evidence in International Arbitration, Iurgium, Vol. 2022, No. 43, pp. 15–30.
Asensio, P. M., 2024, Conflict of Laws and the Internet, 2nd edition, Elgar Information Law and Practice.
Born, G. B., 2014, International Commercial Arbitration, 2nd edition, Alphen aan den Rijn, Kluwer Law International.
Butler, P., Human Rights in International Commercial and Investment Arbitration, in: Kröll, S., Bjorklund, A. K., Ferrari, F., (eds.), 2023, Cambridge Compendium of International Commercial and Investment Arbitration, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp. 139–185.
Chevalier, M., 2021, From Smart Contract Litigation to Blockchain Arbitration, a New Decentralized Approach Leading Towards the Blockchain Arbitral Order, Journal of International Dispute Settlement, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp. 558–584.
Coello, D. M., 2023, The New York Convention on the Enforcement of Decen- tralized Justice System’s Decisions: A Perspective from the Evolutionary Interpretation of Treaties, ITA in Review, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp. 44–83.
Dylag, M., Smith, H., 2023, From cryptocurrencies to cryptocourts: blockchain and the financialization of dispute resolution platforms, Information, Communi- cation & Society, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp. 372–387.
Gaillard, E., Theories of International Arbitration, in: Kröll, S., Bjorklund, A. K., Ferrari, F., (eds.), 2023, Cambridge Compendium of International Commercial and Investment Arbitration, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp. 27–46.
Garner, B. A., (ed.), 2004, Black’s Law Dictionary, deluxe 8th edition, St. Paul, Thomson West.
International Bar Association, 2024, IBA Guidelines on Conflicts of Interest in International Arbitration, 25 May.
Jakšić, A., 2021, Međunarodno privatno pravo, Belgrade, Službeni glasnik.
Jovanović, S., 2023, Arbitration in Smart Contracts Disputes – A Look Into the Future, Annals of the Faculty of Law in Belgrade, Vol. 71, No. 4, pp. 757–784.
Kaufmann-Kohler, G., 2009, When arbitrators facilitate settlement: towards a transnational standard, Arbitration international, Vol. 25, No. 2, pp. 187–205.
Knežević, G., Pavić, V., 2013, Arbitraža i ADR, 3rd edition, Belgrade, Pravni fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu.
Michaels, R., Is Arbitration Autonomous?, in: Lim, C. L., (ed.), 2021, The Cambridge Companion to International Arbitration, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp. 115–137.
Michaels, R., Roles and Perceptions of International Arbitrators, An Introduction, in: Mattli, W., Dietz, T., (eds.), 2014, International Arbitration and Global Governance, Contending Theories and Evidence, Oxford, Oxford University Press, pp. 47–73.
Michaels, R., 2010, The Mirage of Non-State Governance, Utah Law Review, pp. 31–45.
Montoya, S. C., 2024, Resolving crypto disputes through arbitration: the Binance case before the Hong Kong International Arbitration Center (HKIAC). The Law. Mediación y arbitraje, No. 18, pp. 2–23.
Moses, M. L., 2008, The Principles and Practice of International Commercial Arbitration, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Ortolani, P., 2019, The impact of blockchain technologies and smart contracts on dispute resolution: arbitration and court litigation at the crossroads, Uniform Law Review, Vol. 24, No. 2, pp. 430–448.
Pavić, V., Djordjević, M., 2021, Virtual Arbitration Hearings: The New Normal?, Annals of the Faculty of Law in Belgrade, Vol. 69, No. 3, pp. 547–573.
Rees, P. J., Rohn, P., 2009, Dissenting Opinions: Can they Fulfil a Beneficial Role?, Arbitration International, Vol. 25, No. 3, pp. 329–346.
Rensmann, T., 1998, Anational Arbitral Awards, Journal of International Arbitra-
tion, Vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 37–66.
Schramm, D., Elliott, G., Pinsolle, P., Article II, in: Kronke, H. et al., (eds.), 2010, Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards: A Global Commentary on the New York Convention, Alphen aan den Rijn, Kluwer Law International.
Sharma, C., 2022, Blockchain Arbitral Award: Potential Challenges in Recognition and Enforcement under the New York Convention, Revista Română de Arbi- traj, Vol. 16, No. 4, pp. 85–107.
Stanivuković, M., Adjudication as a Preliminary Step to Arbitration: A Case of First Impression in Serbia, in: Keča, R., (ed.), 2018, Harmonisation of Serbian and Hungarian Law with the European Union Law, pp. 137–166.
Stanivuković, M., 2013, Međunarodna arbitraža, Belgrade, Službeni glasnik.
Steingruber, A. M., 2021, Chapter 4: Тhe Juridical Nature of Arbitration with Particular Regard to its Consensual Nature, Consent in International Arbitration, Oxford, Oxford University Press, pp. 53–68.
Tan, J. H., 2023, Blockchain “Arbitration” for NFT-Related Disputes, Contempo- rary Asia Arbitration Journal, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 145–186.
Thöne, M., 2016, Delocalisation in International Commercial Arbitration, SchiedsVZ | German Arbitration Journal, Vol. 14, No. 5, pp. 257–262.
Varadi, T. et al., 2020, Međunarodno privatno pravo, 19th edition, Belgrade, Pravni fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu.
Várady, T., 2009, Waiver in Arbitral Proceedings and Limitations on Waiver, Annals of the Faculty of Law in Belgrade, Vol. 57, No. 3, pp. 6–22.
Wolff, R., Article I, in: Wolff, R., (ed.), 2019, New York Convention: Article-by-Ar-ticle Commentary, 2nd edition.
Legislative Sources
Arbitration Act, Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia, No. 46/2006.
Law on the Ratification of the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, Official Gazette of the SFRY – International Treaties, No. 11/81.
Law Commission, 2021, Smart Legal Contracts, Law Com No. 401.
UNCITRAL, 2015a, Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (New York 1958), New York, United Nations, (https://uncitral. un.org/sites/uncitral.un.org/files/media-documents/uncitral/en/new-york-con- vention-e.pdf, 23. 4. 2025).
UNCITRAL, 2015b, United Nations Convention on Transparency in Treaty-based Investor-State Arbitration, New York, United Nations, (https://uncitral.un.org/ sites/uncitral.un.org/files/media-documents/uncitral/en/transparency-conven- tion-e.pdf, 23. 4. 2025).
UNCITRAL, 1999, UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce (1996) with additional article 5 bis as adopted in 1998, New York, United Nations.
UNCITRAL, 2002, UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Signatures with Guide to
Enactment 2001, New York, United Nations.
UN GA Res. 60/21, Convention on the Use of Electronic Communications in Inter-
national Contracts, UN Doc. A/RES/60/21 (9 December 2005).
Internet Sources
Ast, F., Dimov, D., 2018, Is Kleros a Fair Dispute Resolution System?, Kleros, (https://blog.kleros.io/is-kleros-a-fair-dispute-resolution-system, 22. 9. 2024).
Belgrade Arbitration Center, 2018, Belgrade Rules on Commodity Arbitration, (https://www.arbitrationassociation.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Pravil- nik-o-resavanju-berzanskih-sporova.pdf, 27. 4. 2025).
Chan E. et al., 2022, Paris Arbitration Week Recap: Metaverse-Related Sessions, Klu- wer Arbitration Blog, (https://arbitrationblog.kluwerarbitration.com/2022/04/24/ paris-arbitration-week-recap-metaverse-related-sessions, 22. 9. 2024).
Disparte, D., Walia, M., 2023, 2022 was a hard year for crypto – but it may have been just what the industry needed, World Economic Forum, (https://www.we- forum.org/agenda/2023/04/2022-was-a-hard-year-for-cryptocurrencies-but-it- may-have-been-just-what-the-industry-needed, 22. 9. 2024).
JAMS, JAMS Smart Contract Clause and Rules (Draft), (https://www.jamsadr. com/rules-smart-contracts, 22. 9. 2024).
Kleros.io, 2020, Dispute Revolution: the Kleros Handbook of Decentralized Justice, Kleros, (https://kleros.io/book.pdf, 22. 9. 2024).
Lacasa, P., 2022, Can Blockchain Arbitration become a proper ‘International Arbitration’? Jurors vs. Arbitrators, Conflicts in Law.net, (https://conflictoflaws. net/2022/can-blockchain-arbitration-become-a-proper-international-arbitra- tion-jurors-vs-arbitrators/, 22. 9. 2024).
Lesaege, C., George, W., Ast, F., 2021, Kleros Long Paper v2.0.2, Kleros, (https:// kleros.io/yellowpaper.pdf, 15. 10. 2024).
London Court of International Arbitration, 2020, LCIA Arbitration Rules 2020, (https://www.lcia.org/Dispute_Resolution_Services/lcia-arbitration-rules-2020, 24. 4. 2025).
New York Convention, n.d., Contracting States, (https://www.newyorkconven- tion.org/contracting-states, 18. 10. 2024).
Purdue Global Law School, 2023, A Look at the Use of Blockchain Technology in the Arbitration Process, Purdue Global, 19 May, (https://www.purduegloballaw- school.edu/blog/news/blockchain-arbitration, 22. 9. 2024).
Quiros, F., 2020, Federico Ast, cofundador y CEO de Kleros: Blockchain tiene muchas aplicaciones en el ámbito legal, Cointelegraph, 10 February, (https://es. cointelegraph.com/news/federico-ast-co-founder-and-ceo-of-kleros-blockchain- has-many-applications-in-the-legal-field, 22. 9. 2024).
Sajjad, R., 2023, Blockchain Arbitration: Promises and Perils, The American Re- view of International Arbitration Blog, 23 March, (https://aria.law.columbia.edu/ blockchain-arbitration-promises-and-perils/, 22. 9. 2024).
Sanyal, A., 2022, Arbitration Tech Toolbox: Can the New York Convention Stand the Test of Technology Posed by Metaverse Awards?, Kluwer Arbitration Blog, 20 December, (https://arbitrationblog.kluwerarbitration.com/2022/12/20/arbitra- tion-tech-toolbox-can-the-new-york-convention-stand-the-test-of-technology- posed-by-metaverse-awards, 22. 9. 2024).
Taylor, E., Wu, J., Li, Z., 2022, Crypto Arbitration: A Survival Guide, Klu- wer Arbitration Blog, 29 September, (https://arbitrationblog.kluwerarbitration. com/2022/09/29/crypto-arbitration-a-survival-guide, 22. 9. 2024).
UNCITRAL, n.d., Recommendation regarding the interpretation of article II, paragraph 2, and article VII, paragraph 1, of the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, done in New York, 10 June 1958 (2006), (https://uncitral.un.org/en/texts/arbitration/explanatorytexts/recommen- dations/foreign_arbitral_awards, 23. 4. 2025).