ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE

RESOLUTION

DR. RODEL A. TATON,LL.M, DCL

Doctor of Civil Law. Private Practitioner.
DEAN, Graduate School of Law
San Sebastian College Recoletos-Manila
Bar Reviewer, MCLE Lecturer. Professor of Law

SPECIAL BAR REVIEW LECTURE

Recoletos Law Center
 LECTURE COVERAGE

I. The General Concept of Dispute Settlement

II. Mediation and other modes of dispute settlement
III. Arbitration
IV. Republic Act 876
V. Republic Act 9285
VI. Implementing Rules and Regulations
VII. Special Rules of Court on ADR
VIII. The New York Convention
IX. International Arbitration
X. International Commercial Arbitration
XI. Cases
WHAT WHAT IS A DISPUTE?

A dispute is a disagreement on a
point of law or fact, a conflict of legal
views or interests between two
persons, natural or juridical.
ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION

“It means any process or procedure used to

resolve a dispute or controversy, other than by
adjudication of a presiding judge of a court or an
officer of a government agency, in which a neutral
third party participates to assist in the resolution of
issues, which includes arbitration, mediation,
conciliation, early neutral evaluation, mini-trial, or
any combination thereof” (RA 9285)
Alternative dispute resolution methods or ADRs -- like
arbitration, mediation, negotiation and conciliation -- are
encouraged by the Supreme Court. By enabling parties to
resolve their disputes amicably, they provide solutions that
are less time-consuming, less tedious, less confrontational,
and more productive of goodwill and lasting relationships.
(LM POWER ENGINEERING CORPORATION, vs.CAPITOL INDUSTRIAL CONSTRUCTION GROUPS, INC. G.R.
No. 141833 March 26, 2003)
In our jurisdiction, the policy is to favor alternative methods of
resolving disputes, particularly in civil and commercial
disputes. Arbitration along with mediation, conciliation, and
negotiation, being inexpensive, speedy and less hostile
methods have long been favored by this Court.

(KOREA TECHNOLOGIES CO., LTD vs JUDGE LERMA G.R. No. 143581, January 7, 2008 )
CIVIL CODE PROVISIONS

ART. 2028. A compromise is a contract whereby the

parties, by making reciprocal concessions, avoid a
litigation or put an end to one already commenced.

ART. 2029. The court shall endeavor to persuade

the litigants in a civil case to agree upon some fair
compromise.
Article 2030- 2046
CIVIL CODE PROVISIONS

ART. 2035. No compromise upon the following

questions shall be valid:
(1) The civil status of persons;
(2) The validity of a marriage or a legal separation;
(3) Any ground for legal separation;
(4) Future support;
(5) The jurisdiction of courts;
(6) Future legitime.
CIVIL CODE PROVISIONS

ART. 2037. A compromise has upon the parties the

effect and authority of res judicata; but there shall
be no execution except in compliance with a
judicial compromise.

ART. 2044. Any stipulation that the arbitrators'

award or decision shall be final, is valid, without
prejudice to articles 2038, 2039, and 2040.
REPUBLIC ACT 7160

As in other arbitral proceedings, an award of the Lupon

Tagapamayapa has the “force and effect of a final
judgment of a court” and “may be enforced by execution
by the Lupon within six (6) months from the date of
settlement. After the lapse of time, the settlement may be
enforced in an action in the appropriate city or municipal
court.”
UNITED NATIONS
The parties to any dispute… shall, first of all, seek a
solution by negotiation, enquiry, mediation,
conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement… or
other peaceful means of their own choice.
-UN Charter Article 33.1 (1945)

States “shall accordingly seek early and just

settlement of their international disputes by
negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation….
-UN General Assembly
Res.2625(XXV) of 1970
Modes of Dispute Settlement

• Negotiation
• Enquiry
• Mediation
• Conciliation
• Arbitration
• Action/Resort to Regional Arrangement
• Judicial settlement
Modes of Dispute Settlement

• Negotiation
• Enquiry
• Mediation
• Conciliation
• Arbitration
• Action/Resort to Regional Arrangement
• Judicial settlement
Negotiation

means the direct discussion of a dispute by

the parties through representatives or
officials appointed for the purpose.
INQUIRY

Inquiry is an investigation of the points in

question where parties are unwilling or
unable to agree on certain facts.
Mediation

Mediation is a process of settlement of a

dispute undertaken by a third State, a
group of States, an individual, an agency or
an international organization.
TENDER OF GOOD OFFICES

Tender of Good Offices is a method by which a third

party attempts to bring the disputing states together in
order to enable them to discuss the issues in contention
and arrive at an agreement.
 CONCILIATION

The process of conciliation also calls for the active

participation of a third party in the attempt of the
disputants to settle their conflict and the
recommendation made by it are likewise not
binding.
Resort to Regional Arrangements

Action or Resort to Regional Arrangements and

other Agencies, where parties on their own
volition or taken by the body itself, if allowed by
agreement of the members.
Conflict Resolution Spectrum

Mediation Arbitration
Litigation

Negotiation
 Negotiation
DECISION

Party A Party B

Parties control the process.

Parties engage in verbal interaction completely in their own terms.
Decision is made by the parties.
Outcome is whatever the parties agree to.
 Mediation
Mediator

Disputant Disputant

DECISION

Mediator agreed to by the parties.

Informal Process controlled by the Mediator.
Mediator is independent and impartial facilitator.
Parties fully participate in deciding issues, creating,
evaluating and agreeing options.
Focus is on the present and future and solving problem.
Outcome aims for mutually accepted win-win solution.
 Arbitration
DECISION

Arbitrator

Plaintiff Defendant

Arbitrator appointed by the parties.

Formal process – regulated by arbitration procedures.
Parties input ideas and background.
Adversarial proceedings.
Focus is on rights and past events.
Decisions, which is based on evidence and technical assessment , is imposed on the
parties by the Arbitrator.
 Litigation
DECISION

Judge

Plaintiff Defendant

Judge appointed by the state.

Formal Process regulated by Rules of Evidence and Court
Procedure.
Role of lawyer is to act as advocate and discredit
opposition.
Adversarial process where lawyers act in parties’ behalf.
Focus is on rights and past events.
Decision is imposed on the parties by the Judge.
THE ADR ACT OF 2004
 OVERVIEW
• GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF ADR

• PARTY AUTONOMY (SEC 2)

• Policy to Encourage and Actively Promote ADR (Sec2)
• Liabilities of the ADR Providers are the same as liabilities of public
officers under Section 30 (1) of the Administrative Code of 1987
(Sec 5)
• I.e. clear showing of bad faith, malice or gross negligence
• Note the Exceptions of Application of ADR
 MEDIATION
• A voluntary process in which a mediator selected by
the disputing parties, facilitates communication and
negotiation, and assists the parties in reaching a
voluntary agreement regarding a dispute.
KINDS OF MEDIATION

• Court Annexed
• - The Court has already acquired jurisdiction
• -Covered by SC Circulars and memorandum

• Not Court Annexed

• -Covered by RA 9285, the ADR Law
• -Institutional
• Ad Hoc
FEATURES OF MEDIATION
• A. Confidentiality
• - General Rule: Information obtained through mediation shall be
privileged and confidential/ inadmissible. (Sec 9 ADR Law)

• Exceptions:
• 1. Waiver (sec 10)
• 2. Required by law to be Opened
• 3. Signed Agreement of the parties
• 4. Threat or plan to commit bodily injury or a crime or concealing a crime
• 5.To prove and disprove abuse, neglect abandonment, exploitation;
• 6. To prove or disprove a claim of professional misconduct or malpractice filed
against a mediator
• Available in public or/ made in public
FEATURES OF MEDIATION

• B. Disclosures of a mediator re impartiality and conflict of

interest
• C. A party may designate a lawyer or any other person to
provide assistance in mediation (Sec 14 ADR Law)
• D. Parties are free to agree on the place of mediation (Sec 15)
• ADR Law prevails over provisions of institutional rules.
• E. Enforcement of Mediated Settlements (Compromise agreements)
HOW IS MEDIATION ENFORCED

• 1. The agreement may be deposited in an RTC where one of

the parties reside. A petition to enforce the agreement may be
filed with that court. Hearing will be summary.
• Parties may agree in the settlement agreement that the
mediator shall become a sole arbitrator and shall treat the
settlement agreement as an arbitral award which shall be
enforced under RA 876 (RA 9285)
OTHER FORMS OF ADR

• 1. Evaluation of a third person

• Early neutral evaluation- ADR process where parties and their
lawyers are brought together early in a pre-trial phase to
present summaries of their cases and receive a non binding
assessment by an experienced, neutral person, with expertise
in the subject in the substance of the dispute.
OTHER FORMS OF ADR

• 2. Mini-Trial
• A structured dispute resolution method in which merits of the a case
are argued before a panel comprising senior decision makers with or
without the presence of a neutral third person after which the parties
seek a negotiated settlement.

• 3. Mediation-Arbitration
• This is a two step dispute resolution process involving both mediation
and arbitration.
THE PROCEDURE
A rbitration
SOURCES OF ARBITRATION LAW

• Republic Act No. 876, otherwise known as the Arbitration

Law, thereby adopting "the modern view that arbitration
as an inexpensive, speedy and amicable method of settling
disputes and as a means of avoiding litigation should
receive every encouragement from the courts.” (1953)
• 10 June 1958, the Philippines became a signatory to the
United Nations Convention on the Recognition and the
Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards of 1958 (the "New
York Convention”). On 6 July 1967, the said Convention
was ratified.
 SOURCES OF ARBITRATION LAW

• Republic Act No. 9285, otherwise know as the Alternative Dispute

Resolution Act of 2004. The enactment of Republic Act No. 9285
was the Philippines solution to making arbitration an efficient and
effective method in dispute resolution specially for international
arbitration.
• Republic Act No. 9285 also ensured that international commercial
arbitration would be governed by the United Nations Commission
in International Trade (“UNCITRAL”) Model Law on International
Arbitration adopted by the United Nations Commission on
International Trade Law on June 21, 1985
 SOURCES OF ARBITRATION LAW

• Republic Act No. 9285 also fortified the use and purpose of the
New York Convention by specifically mandating that it shall govern
the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards covered by
the said convention9, while foreign arbitral awards not covered by
the New York Convention shall be recognized and enforced in
accordance with the procedural rules to be promulgated by the
Supreme Court.
 A.M. No. 07-11-08-SC
September 1, 2009
SPECIAL RULES OF COURT ON
ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION
• ad hoc arbitration, Philippine law grants the parties the right to select
an arbitrator or arbitrators and to choose procedures to govern the
proceedings, including rules of arbitration institutions.
• Institutionalized arbitration is conducted through organized bodies
such as courts of arbitration, trade associations, and arbitration
centers and institutes, each prescribing its own different arbitration
procedure.
• For international arbitration, the popular institutional rules referred
to are those of the International Chamber of Commerce ("ICC"), the
Hongkong International Arbitration Centre ("HKIAC") and the
Singapore International Arbitration Centre ("SIAC").
 Specialized arbitration
• Specialized arbitration involves particular industries or kinds of
disputes. For example, banking disputes on check clearing are
resolved by a specialized system administered under the auspices
of the Bankers' Association of the Philippines. In the construction
industry, the Construction Industry Arbitration Commission (CIAC)
was created in 1985 by Executive Order No. 1008 (E.O. No. 1008) in
recognition of the need for technical expertise to resolve various
factual questions in construction disputes.
 Arbitration
needs consent
of the parties
ARBITRATION CLAUSES

• Arbitration, being essentially consensual in nature, is

dependent on the existence of an agreement that is valid
as to form and substance. Without an agreement that
constitutes the basis of arbitral competence, the arbitrator
or the arbitral tribunal are without jurisdiction to conduct
any proceedings, much less render any decision binding on
the parties or on States in which enforcement may be
sought
ARBITRATION CLAUSES

• Many contracts contain clauses requiring that

disputes be submitted for arbitration because it
removes much of the uncertainty in the event of a
breach of contract or other dispute.
• Can be used for the sale of goods, commodities, or
raw materials. shipping contracts, employment
contracts, international construction contracts,
financing agreements and cruise ship tickets etc.
 ARBITRATION CLAUSE
• Any disputes or claims arising out of this contract, or
breach thereof, shall be resolved by arbitration
before [name if arbitral body], and according to the
rules of that body. Any award rendered thereby may
be entered in any court of competent jurisdiction
 Points to consider when
Drafting an Arbitration Clause

Agreement to Arbitrate
Require Negotiation, Mediation and Select
Conciliation Rules
If so, Fix Time Limit

Provide Optional
3. Choose Procedural Matters
III. Determine Governing Law -Time Limits
the Number --Procedural Law -Language
of Arbitrators Substantive Law
-Discovery
-Consolidation
 Tribunal Issuance Injunctiv
Appointed
Experts of Award e Reliefs
ARBITRATION PROCEDURE
Stage1:
Stage 2: Stage 3:
Filing of the
Formation of Defense &
Request for
Arbitral Tribunal Counterclaims
Arbitration

Stage 4:
Pre-hearing
meetings & 5:Hearings Stage 6:Post-hearing
Preliminary hearings submission
Stage 7. Award
A. Domestic Arbitration

• Subject to the doctrine of forum non conveniens, parties to

an arbitration are free to choose which law would govern
the arbitration proceedings. The parties' choice of law is
usually expressly provided in the arbitration
clause/submission agreement, which constitutes the basis
of arbitral competence and serves as the legal basis for the
arbitration.
Binding Effect of Arbitral Agreements

• Arbitration agreements are treated like any other contract

governed by the Philippine Civil Code provisions on
contracts. Thus, provided the parties agree to be bound by
the terms ofBinding
the arbitration agreement,
Effect of Arbitral 22 and those terms are
Agreements
not contrary to law, morals and good customs, public order
or public policy,23 that agreement is binding on them
Binding Effect of Arbitral Agreements
• Section 2 of Republic Act No. 876
• Sec. 2. Persons and matters subject to arbitration. —
Two or more persons or parties may submit to the
arbitration of one or more arbitrators any controversy
existing between them at the time of the submission and
which may be the subject of an action, or the parties to
any contract may in such contract agree to settle by
arbitration a controversy thereafter arising between them.
Such submission or contract shall be valid, enforceable and
irrevocable, save upon such grounds as exist at law for the
revocation of any contract.
 Scope of the Arbitration Clause/Arbitral
Issues

The question of whether a particular dispute is within the ambit

of an arbitration clause depends upon the terms of the clause
itself. Parties are free to stipulate which disputes and to what
issues may be referred to arbitration.
• The case of Western Minolco Corporation v. Court of Appeals30
(G.R. No. L-51996, Nov. 23. 1988, 167 SCRA 592. )illustrates a
situation involving a limited arbitration clause. In that case, the
parties agreed to refer to arbitration only the issues on the meaning,
application and effect of the agreement, and the amount and
computation of royalties. Thus, when one of the parties referred the
matter of deductions or other items of expense, a controversy
relating to the “breach of faith” or “double dealing” by one of the
parties to arbitration, the Philippine Supreme Court ruled that that
issue is beyond the scope of the arbitral agreement.
•
• In domestic arbitration, it is the court
that decides the issue of whether a
dispute is within the ambit of the
arbitral clause. If the court finds that
the issue is arbitrable, it shall order the
parties to proceed to arbitration.
Interim Remedies
• “It is not incompatible with an arbitration agreement for a party to
request, before the constitution of the arbitral tribunal, from a Court
an interim measure of protection and for the Court to grant such
measure.” “After constituting the arbitral tribunal and during
arbitration proceedings, a request for an interim measure of
protection...may be made with the arbitral tribunal”. Nevertheless, if
the arbitral tribunal has no power to act or is unable to act effectively,
the parties are not precluded from requesting the Court to grant an
interim measure of protection. Significantly, parties may also apply
with a Philippine court for assistance in enforcing an interim measure
granted by the arbitral tribunal
• An arbitral tribunal or Philippine court may grant a party interim relief
for the following purposes:
• a. to prevent irreparable loss or injury, e.g., attachment; b. to require
security for the performance of an obligation; c. to require the
production and preservation of any evidence; and d. to compel any
other act or omission. (Republic Act No. 9285, Section 28. )
Finality of Arbitral Award

• Within one month from the time an arbitral award is rendered, any
party may apply with the Philippine court having jurisdiction over the
same for an order confirming that award. “Upon the granting of an
order confirming, modifying or correcting an award, judgment may be
entered therewith in the court wherein said application was filed.”

• Once the order confirming the arbitral award together with the award
itself is entered in the book of entries of judgment, the arbitral award
becomes final and executory.
It is worthy to note, however, that a CIAC arbitral award is executory
and need not be confirmed by a Philippine court.
an agreement by the parties that the arbitral award or decision shall be
final is valid under Philippine law. According to one Supreme Court
case, however, that agreement does not deter the courts from
reviewing an arbitral award where appropriate. Thus, where there are
grounds for vacating, modifying or rescinding an arbitral award, the
injured party may still seek judicial relief, even if there exists a
contractual stipulation that the decision of the arbitrator shall be final
and unappealable .
INTERNATIONAL
ARBITRATION
• Under the Model Law, parties are
likewise free to stipulate on their
choice of law, both as to rules
applicable to the substance of the
dispute as well as with respect to the
rules of procedure applicable to the
arbitration proceedings
Binding effect of arbitral agreements

• Parties may constitute arbitration agreements, which by definition are

“those agreements of parties to submit to arbitration all or certain
disputes which have arisen or which may arise between them in
respect of a defined legal relationship, whether contractual or not”,
and may either be “in the form of an arbitration clause in a contract
or in a separate agreement”
ENFORCEMENT OF ARBITRATION
AGREEMENTS
• Philippine law treats an arbitration agreement, whether it is domestic
or international in character, as contract. Consequently, an arbitration
agreement is enforceable between the parties unless it is found to be
void, inoperative or incapable of being performed.
• In that regard, a party to an arbitration agreement may compel the
other party to comply with the terms of thereof by instituting an
action against him for specific performance with the courts and/or
proceed ex parte with the arbitration proceedings without the
defaulting party.
• ESTABLISHMENT OF THE ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL
• While it is Philippine policy to actively promote party autonomy in the
resolution of disputes and to give the parties freedom to make their
own arrangements to resolve their disputes
Number of Arbitrators
Qualifications
• be of legal age;
• have full enjoyment of his civil rights;
• know how to read and write;
• not be related by blood or by marriage within sixth degree to
• either party;
• e. have or have had no financial, fiduciary, or other interest in the controversy or cause to be
decided or in result of the proceeding; and
• f. have no personal basis which might prejudice the right of any party to a fair and impartial
award.
• An arbitrator cannot act as champion or advocate for either of the parties to arbitration.84
Neither can he act as mediator nor be present in the negotiations for the settlement of the
dispute
International Arbitration. The Number of
Arbitrators
• Similar to domestic arbitration, parties to an international arbitration
are free to determine the number of arbitrators provided that,
neither party may choose
Qualifications

• The rules applicable to international arbitration do not provide

specific qualifications for arbitrators. Under the Model Law, parties
may provide for such qualifications under their broad authority to
constitute an appointment procedure.
• In any case, the Model Law simply emphasizes the importance of the
arbitrator’s impartiality or independence.
Challenge

• For international arbitration, an arbitrator may be challenged if there

are justifiable doubts as to his impartiality and independence, or if he
does not possess qualifications agreed to by the parties.

• Moreover, “a party may challenge an arbitrator appointed by him, or

in whose appointment he has participated, only for reasons of which
he becomes aware after the appointment has been made
PROCEDURE OF THE ARBITRATION

• Preliminarily, it must be stressed that, for domestic arbitration and

international arbitration, parties are free to decide on the rules of
procedure to be followed by the Arbitral Tribunal in conducting the
proceedings. Absent such agreement, the applicable governing
arbitration law would apply to grant the arbitrators the authority to
devise the same.
INTERNATIONAL
COMMERCIAL
ARBITRATION
The United Nations
Commission on
International Trade
Law (UNCITRAL)
MODEL LAW ON INTERNATIONAL
COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION (UNCITRAL)

Takes into account the various legal systems

and countries in which they might be used. The
UNCITRAL rules, for example are used by the
Hong Kong Arbitration Center, by the WIPO,
and by other organizations throughout the
world.
• (a) the parties to an arbitration agreement
have, at the time of the conclusion of that
agreement, their places of business in different
States; or
• (b) one of the following places is situated outside
the State in which the parties have their places of
business:
i. the place of arbitration if determined
in, or pursuant to, the arbitration agreement
ii. any place where a substantial part of
the obligations of the commercial relationship is to
be performed or the place with which the subject-
matter of the dispute is most closely connected;
or
 (c) the parties have expressly agreed that the
subject-matter of the arbitration agreement
relates to more than one country.

(4) For the purposes of paragraph (3) of this article:

(a)if a party has more than one place of business,
the place of business is that which has the closest
relationship to the arbitration agreement;
(b)if a party does not have a place of business,
reference is to be made to his habitual residence.
“COMMERCIAL”
• cover matters arising from all relationships of a
commercial nature, whether contractual or not.
• It includes trade transactions:
supply or exchange of goods or services;
distribution agreement, commercial
representation or agency; factoring; leasing;
construction of works; consulting; engineering;
licensing; investment; financing; banking;
insurance; exploitation agreement or concession;
joint venture and other forms of industrial or
business co-operation; carriage of goods or
passengers by air, sea, rail or road.
 UNCITRAL's
Model Law RULES

• Arbitration agreement must be in writing.

• Unless the parties provide otherwise, the number of
arbitrators is three; this, so they can determine issues
based on a majority of them
• Each party appoints one arbitrator and the two
arbitrators once constituted, appoints the third member
and acting together, are called an arbitral tribunal;
• The arbitral tribunal has the power to make
preliminary, interlocutory or interim orders as between
the parties;
• The arbitral tribunal will consider any application that
one of the parties to the arbitration provide security;
• "The parties shall be treated with equality and each
party shall be given a full opportunity of presenting his
case"
• "The parties are free to agree on the place of
arbitration. Failing ... agreement, the place of
arbitration shall be determined by the arbitral tribunal
having regard to the circumstances of the case,
including the convenience of the parties" ;
• Provision is made for the exchange of statements
of claim and of defense as well as choice of
language ;
• "The arbitral tribunal shall decide whether to hold
oral hearings for the presentation of evidence or
for oral argument, or whether the proceedings
shall be conducted on the basis of documents and
other materials";
• "The arbitral tribunal shall decide the dispute in
accordance with such rules of law as are chosen by
the parties as applicable to the substance of the
dispute"
• "The award shall be made in writing and shall be
signed by the arbitrators;
• The grounds for setting aside an award are very
limited and are set out at . For example, evidence
would be required that the arbitration agreeement
or arbitration clause was not legally binding, void
or invalid; that there had been improper notice of
arbitration or that the award exceeded the scope
of arbitration; and

• Awards are stated to be binding and, upon written

registration, enforceable by the court .
 THE NEW YORK
CONVENTION/
ENFORCEMENT OF
ARBITRATION AWARD
The goal of the New York Convention is to facilitate international
business transactions by promoting enforcement of arbitral
agreements in contracts involving international commerce
OBJECTIVES

• to provide common legislative standards for the

recognition of arbitration agreements and court
recognition and enforcement of foreign and non-
domestic arbitral awards.

• The term "non-domestic" appears to embrace

awards which, although made in the state of
enforcement, are treated as "foreign" under its law
because of some foreign element in the
proceedings, e.g. another State's procedural laws
are applied.
• The Convention's principal aim is that foreign and
non-domestic arbitral awards will not be
discriminated against and it obliges Parties to ensure
such awards are recognized and generally capable
of enforcement in their jurisdiction in the same way
as domestic awards.
• An ancillary aim of the Convention is to require
courts of Parties to give full effect to arbitration
agreements by requiring courts to deny the parties
access to court in contravention of their agreement
to refer the matter to an arbitral tribunal.
COVERAGE (ARTICLE I)

• 1. This Convention shall apply to the recognition and

enforcement of arbitral awards made in the territory of
a State other than the State where the recognition and
enforcement of such awards are sought, and arising
out of differences between persons, whether physical
or legal. It shall also apply to arbitral awards not
considered as domestic awards in the State where their
recognition and enforcement are sought.
Article III
• Each Contracting State shall recognize arbitral awards
as binding and enforce them in accordance with the
rules of procedure of the territory where the award is
relied upon.
• There shall not be imposed substantially more
onerous conditions or higher fees or charges on the
recognition or enforcement of arbitral awards to which
this Convention applies than are imposed on the
recognition or enforcement of domestic arbitral
awards.
The New York Convention applies if three basic
requirements are met:
• The award arises out of a legal relationship.
• The relationship is commercial in nature.
• The award arises out of a relationship not entirely
domestic in scope.
• The Convention allows for recognition and
enforcement of an award that complies with the
laws of the country where the arbitration occurred.
In this regard the starting point for the enforcement
is the form of the award.
In very generic terms an award will likely contain the
following elements:
• Jurisdictional basis:
• should indicate the existence of the arbitration
agreement, in writing
• The award should identify the source and attributes of
the agreement, including any prerequisites or conditions
for arbitration, as well as how the parties complied with
them.
• sufficient facts to show that the tribunal was properly
constituted and that each party was given an adequate
opportunity to state his case.
• The tribunal's decision:
• the tribunal's direction to the parties. Each
direction in the award must be specific,
unambiguous and capable of performance by the
party against whom it is directed.
• The directions should not be conditional save in
exceptional circumstances where the possibility
of including a conditional element in the award
has been canvassed and agreed by the parties.
• There should be no conditions or requirements
which make the award impracticable to enforce.
• An analysis of the legal and factual basis
for the award:
• A statement of findings of fact necessary to the
award. In most jurisdictions findings of fact are
not appealable.
ADR Law
B. FOREIGN ARBITRAL AWARDS
• SEC. 42. Application of the New York
Convention.
• The recognition and enforcement of such arbitral
awards shall be filed with regional trial court in
accordance with the rules of procedure
• SEC. 43. Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign
Arbitral Awards Not Covered by the New York
Convention. –
• shall be done in accordance with procedural rules to be
promulgated by the Supreme Court.
• The Court may, grounds of comity and reciprocity, recognize
and enforce a nonconvention award as a convention award.
• SEC. 44. Foreign Arbitral Award Not Foreign
Judgment. –
• when confirmed by a court of a foreign country,
shall be recognized and enforced as a foreign
arbitral award and not a judgment of a foreign
court.
• when confirmed by the RTC, shall be enforced as a
foreign arbitral award and not as a judgment of a
foreign court.
• as final and executory decisions of courts of law of
the Philippines.
ROLE of the COURTS in Arbitration
1. Enforcement of arbitration agreements
2. Interim relief
3. Enforcement of Arbitral Award
4. Vacating, modifying, correcting arbitral
awards
5. Appealing arbitral awards
A.M. NO. 07-11-08 SC
September 1, 2009
Special Rules of Court
on Alternative Dispute Resolution
Principle of competence-competence-

• the arbitral tribunal may initially rule on its own

jurisdiction, including any objection with respect
to the existence or validity of the arbitration
agreement or any condition precedent to the
filing of a request for arbitration.
Principle of separability

• Principle of separability of the arbitration clause-

means that the said clause shall be treated as an
agreement independent of the other terms of the
contract of which it forms part.

• A decision that the contract is null and void shall

not entail ipso jure the invalidity of the arbitration
clause.
• Rule 2.2. Policy on arbitration.- (A) Where the
parties have agreed to submit their dispute to
arbitration, courts shall refer the parties to
arbitration pursuant to Republic Act No. 9285
bearing in mind that such arbitration agreement is
the law between the parties and that they are
expected to abide by it in good faith.
Further, the courts shall not refuse to refer parties to arbitration for
reasons including, but not limited to, the following:
a. The referral tends to oust a court of its jurisdiction;
b. The court is in a better position to resolve the dispute subject
of arbitration;
c. The referral would result in multiplicity of suits;
d. The arbitration proceeding has not commenced;
e. The place of arbitration is in a foreign country;
f. One or more of the issues are legal and one or more of the
arbitrators are not lawyers;
g. One or more of the arbitrators are not Philippine nationals; or
h. One or more of the arbitrators are alleged not to possess the
required qualification under the arbitration agreement or law.
RULE 12:
RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT OR
SETTING ASIDE OF AN
INTERNATIONALCOMMERCIAL
ARBITRATION AWARD
Rule 12.1.
Who may request recognition and enforcement
or setting aside. - Any party to an international
commercial arbitration in the Philippines may
petition the proper court to recognize and
enforce or set aside an arbitral award.
Rule 12.2. When to file petition

(A) Petition to recognize and enforce.

- may be filed anytime from receipt of the award.

-If, however, a timely petition to set aside an

arbitral award is filed, the opposing party must file
therein and in opposition thereto the petition for
recognition and enforcement of the same award
within the period for filing an opposition
(B) Petition to set aside. -
• may only be filed within three (3) months from the time the
petitioner receives a copy of the award.
• If a timely request is made with the arbitral tribunal for
correction, interpretation or additional award, the three (3)
month period shall be counted from the time the petitioner
receives the resolution by the arbitral tribunal of that request.
• can no longer be filed after the lapse of the three (3) month
period.
• The dismissal of a petition to set aside an arbitral award for
being time-barred shall not automatically result in the approval
of the petition filed therein and in opposition thereto for
recognition and enforcement of the same award.
• Failure to file a petition to set aside shall preclude a party from
raising grounds to resist enforcement of the award.
Rule 12.3. Venue
• Regional Trial Court

where the act to

where arbitration
be enjoined will be
proceedings were where any of the
or is being
conducted assets to be
performed
attached or levied
upon is located
where any of the
parties to
arbitration resides
or has its place of in the National
business Capital Judicial
Region
 Rule 12.4. Grounds
to set aside or resist
enforcement.

or the said agreement is not valid

A party to the arbitration under the law to which the
agreement was under some parties have subjected it or,
incapacity failing any indication thereof,
under Philippine law

The party making the application to set aside or resist enforcement

was not given proper notice of the appointment of an arbitrator or of
the arbitral proceedings or was otherwise unable to present his
case;
 Rule 12.4. Grounds
to set aside or resist
enforcement.

• The court may set aside or refuse the enforcement of the arbitral
award only if:
• a. The party making the application furnishes proof that:
• A party to the arbitration agreement was under some incapacity,
• (i). or the said agreement is not valid under the law to which the
parties have subjected it or, failing any indication thereof, under
Philippine law; or
• (ii). The party making the application to set aside or resist
enforcement was not given proper notice of the appointment of
an arbitrator or of the arbitral proceedings or was otherwise
unable to present his case; or
• (iii). The award deals with a dispute not contemplated by
or not falling within the terms of the submission to
arbitration, or contains decisions on matters beyond the
scope of the submission to arbitration
• (iv). The composition of the arbitral tribunal or the
arbitral procedure was not in accordance with the
agreement of the parties, unless such agreement was in
conflict with a provision of Philippine law from which the
parties cannot derogate, or, failing such agreement, was
not in accordance with Philippine law;
• b. The court finds that:
• (i). The subject-matter of the dispute is not capable
of settlement by arbitration under the law of the
Philippines; or
• (ii). The recognition or enforcement of the award
would be contrary to public policy.
• In deciding the petition, the Court shall disregard
any other ground to set aside or enforce the arbitral
award other than those enumerated above.
• The petition to set-aside based on Minority and
Incapacity
• shall be filed only on behalf of the minor or
incompetent and shall allege that (a) the other party
to arbitration had knowingly entered into a
submission or agreement with such minor or
incompetent, or (b) the submission to arbitration
was made by a guardian or guardian ad litem who
was not authorized to do so by a competent court.
Rule 12.5. Exclusive recourse
against arbitral award.

• Recourse to a court against an arbitral award shall

be made only through a petition to set aside the
arbitral award and on grounds prescribed by the
law that governs international commercial
arbitration. Any other recourse from the arbitral
award, such as by appeal or petition for review or
petition for certiorari or otherwise, shall be
DISMISSED by the court.
Rule 12.7. Contents of petition
a. The addresses of record, or any change thereof, of the
parties to arbitration;
b. A statement that the arbitration agreement or
submission exists;
c. The names of the arbitrators and proof of their
appointment;
d. A statement that an arbitral award was issued and when
the petitioner received it; and
e. The relief sought.
(B) Petition to set aside
• shall have the same contents as a petition to recognize and
enforce or petition to recognize and enforce in opposition to a
petition to set aside an arbitral award.
• If minority is the ground, attach documents
• If incapacity, proof of no authority.
• the petitioner shall apprise the court before which the petition to
recognize and enforce or set aside is pending of the status of the
appeal or its resolution in the other court.
Rule 12.12. Presumption in favor of
confirmation. - It is presumed that an arbitral
award was made and released in due course
and is subject to enforcement by the court,
unless the adverse party is able to establish a
ground for setting aside or not enforcing an
arbitral award.
• Rule 12.13. Judgment of the court.

• Unless a ground to set aside an arbitral award under Rule 12.4

above is fully established, the court shall dismiss the petition. If,
in the same proceedings, there is a petition to recognize and
enforce the arbitral award filed in opposition to the petition to set
aside, the court shall recognize and enforce the award.
• In resolving the petition or petition in opposition thereto in
accordance with the Special ADR Rules, the court shall either
set aside or enforce the arbitral award. The court shall not
disturb the arbitral tribunal’s determination of facts and/or
interpretation of law.
RULE 13: RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT OF
A FOREIGN ARBITRAL AWARD

• Rule 13.1. Who may request recognition and

enforcement. - Any party to a foreign arbitration may
petition the court to recognize and enforce a foreign
arbitral award.
• Rule 13.2. When to petition. - At any time after receipt
of a foreign arbitral award, any party to arbitration may
petition the proper Regional Trial Court to recognize
and enforce such award.
Rule 13.3. Venue
(a) where the
(c) in the principal
assets to be (b) where the act to
place of business in
attached or be enjoined is being
the Philippines of
levied upon is performed,
any of the parties
located

(d) if any of the

parties is an (e) in the National
individual, where Capital Judicial
any of those Region.
individuals resides,
Rule 13.4. Governing law and grounds to refuse
recognition and enforcement.
- The1958 New York Convention on the Recognition
and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (the
"New York Convention") and
- SPECIAL RULES OF COURT ON ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE
RESOLUTION
- The court may, upon grounds of comity and
reciprocity, recognize and enforce a foreign arbitral
award made in a country that is not a signatory to the
New York Convention as if it were a Convention
Award.
• A Philippine court shall not set aside a foreign arbitral award but
may refuse it recognition and enforcement on any or all of the
following grounds:
• a. The party making the application to refuse recognition and
enforcement of the award furnishes proof that:
(i). A party to the arbitration agreement was under some
incapacity; or the said agreement is not valid under the
law to which the parties have subjected it or, failing any
indication thereof, under the law of the country where the
award was made; or
(ii). The party making the application was not given
proper notice of the appointment of an arbitrator or of the
arbitral proceedings or was otherwise unable to present
his case; or
 (iii). The award deals with a dispute not contemplated by
or not falling within the terms of the submission to arbitration, or
contains decisions on matters beyond the scope of the
submission to arbitration;

(iv). The composition of the arbitral tribunal or the arbitral

procedure was not in accordance with the agreement of the
parties or, failing such agreement, was not in accordance with
the law of the country where arbitration took place; or

(v). The award has not yet become binding on the parties
or has been set aside or suspended by a court of the country in
which that award was made; or
• b. The court finds that:
(i). The subject-matter of the dispute is not capable
of settlement or resolution by arbitration under
Philippine law; or
(ii). The recognition or enforcement of the award
would be contrary to public policy.

The court shall disregard any ground for opposing

the recognition and enforcement of a foreign
arbitral award other than those enumerated above.
Rule 13.5. Contents of petition

• The petition shall state the following:

• a. The addresses of the parties to arbitration;
• b. In the absence of any indication in the award, the
country where the arbitral award was made and
whether such country is a signatory to the New York
Convention; and
• c. The relief sought.
• Apart from other submissions, the petition
shall have attached to it the following:
a. An authentic copy of that arbitration
agreement; and
b. An authentic copy of the arbitral award.
Rule 13.11. Court action. -
It is presumed that a foreign arbitral award was made and released
in due course of arbitration and is subject to enforcement by the
court.

The court shall recognize and enforce a foreign arbitral award

unless a ground to refuse recognition or enforcement of the foreign
arbitral award under this rule is fully established.

The decision of the court recognizing and enforcing a foreign

arbitral award is immediately executory.
• In resolving the petition for recognition and
enforcement of a foreign arbitral award in
accordance with these Special ADR Rules, the
court shall either
• [a] recognize and/or enforce or
• [b] refuse to recognize and enforce the arbitral
award.
• The court shall not disturb the arbitral
tribunal’s determination of facts and/or
interpretation of law.
Arbitration and adjudication as ‘Legal’ means.

Arbitration is more flexible overall because the

principle of party autonomy governs the
process. Therefore, international arbitration is
traditionally considered as more yielding to
sovereignty than litigation before an
international court
(Anne Peters)
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes
(ICSID)

(Decision on Objections to Jurisdiction): SGS Société Générale de

Surveillance S.A. v. Republic of the Philippines, Case No.
ARB/02/6 (January 29, 2004)
• Subject Matter : Service agreement
• Date Registered June 06, 2002
• Date of Constitution of Tribunal : September 18, 2002
• Composition of Tribunal: President: Ahmed Sadek EL-KOSHERI
(Egyptian)
Arbitrators: Antonio CRIVELLARO (Italian))
James R. CRAWFORD (Australian
In August 1991, SGS, a Swiss company, concluded an agreement, the
"CISS Agreement" with the Republic of the Philippines ("the Philippines")
concerning the provision of services in order to improve customs clearance
and processing in the Philippines. A dispute arose between the parties
concerning alleged nonpayment of invoices by the Philippine Bureau of
Customs.

The Tribunal concluded that SGS had not presented a case for
expropriation under international law, however it found that some of SGS's
claims brought pursuant to the Philippines-Swiss Bilateral Investment
Treaty (BIT) were admissible. The Tribunal concluded that while claims for
breach of the BIT arising from the contract were admissible, the BIT
nevertheless did not override an exclusive jurisdiction clause contained in
the contract that it found to be binding on the parties. The Tribunal stayed
the proceedings pending the determination of the amount payable by the
Philippines, a determination that could be made either by agreement of the
parties or by a decision of the Philippine courts.
Fraport AG Frankfurt Airport Services Worldwide v. Republic of the
Philippines (ICSID Case No. ARB/03/25)

• Subject Matter : Construction of an airport terminal (a) Original

Arbitration Proceeding Date Registered October 09, 2003
• Date of Constitution of Tribunal : February 11, 2004
• Composition of Tribunal: President: L. Yves FORTIER
(Canadian)
Arbitrators: Bernardo M. CREMADES (Spanish)
W. Michael REISMAN (U.S.)
Outcome of Proceeding Award rendered on August 16, 2007;

• (b) Annulment Proceeding

• Date Registered January 08, 2008
• Date of Constitution of Ad hoc Committee : April 14, 2008
• Composition of Ad hoc Committee :
• President: Peter TOMKA (Slovak)
• Members: Dominique HASCHER (French)
Campbell McLACHLAN (New Zealand)

Outcome of Proceeding: The ad hoc Committee issues its decision on

annulment on December 23, 2010.
• There was no contract between Philippine government and
Fraport to enter into a contract for the building or operation
of NAIA3.
• Fraport is only a creditor of the Philippine International Air
Terminals Corp. It is Piatco that has a government contract
to build and operate the new terminal in Pasay City. NAIA 3
is the first major investment of Fraport.
• Fraport has 40% equity in Piatco, reportedly advanced
money that its Philippine Partners needed to satisfy the 60%
Filipino capitalization requirement.
Westinghouse Settlement Case
• Westinghouse and its affiliates including
Burns and Roe filed commercial claims
against National Power Corporation and the
Republic of the Philippines before the
International Court of Arbitration (ICA) based
in Geneva, Switzerland.
• This pertains to the Bataan Nuclear Power
Plant.
KOREA TECHNOLOGIES CO., LTD., petitioner, vs. HON.
ALBERTO A. LERMA and PACIFIC GENERAL STEEL
MANUFACTURING CORPORATION
G.R. No. 143581, January 7, 2008
In our jurisdiction, the policy is to favor alternative
methods of resolving disputes, particularly in civil and
commercial disputes. Arbitration along with mediation,
conciliation, and negotiation, being inexpensive,
speedy and less hostile methods have long been
favored by this Court. The petition before us puts at
issue an arbitration clause in a contract mutually
agreed upon by the parties stipulating that they would
submit themselves to arbitration in a foreign country
• Petitioner Korea Technologies Co., Ltd. (KOGIES) is a
Korean corporation which is engaged in the supply and
installation of Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) Cylinder
manufacturing plants, while private respondent Pacific
General Steel Manufacturing Corp. (PGSMC) is a domestic
corporation.
• PGSMC and KOGIES executed a Contract
• The contract provided an arbitration clause which stipulates
that the arbitration must be done in Seoul, Korea in
accordance with the Commercial Arbitration Rules of the
KCAB, and that the arbitral award is final and binding.
• Art. 15 of the Contract is the arbitration clause. It provides:
Article 15. Arbitration.—All disputes, controversies, or
differences which may arise between the parties, out of or
in relation to or in connection with this Contract or for the
breach thereof, shall finally be settled by arbitration in
Seoul, Korea in accordance with the Commercial Arbitration
Rules of the Korean Commercial Arbitration Board. The
award rendered by the arbitration(s) shall be final and
binding upon both parties concerned. (Emphasis
supplied.)
• Petitioner claims the RTC and the CA erred in ruling that the
arbitration clause is null and void.
• Petitioner is correct.
• Established in this jurisdiction is the rule that the law of
the place where the contract is made governs. Lex loci
contractus. The contract in this case was perfected
here in the Philippines. Therefore, our laws ought to
govern. Nonetheless, Art. 2044 of the Civil Code
sanctions the validity of mutually agreed arbitral clause
or the finality and binding effect of an arbitral award. Art.
2044 provides, "Any stipulation that the arbitrators’
award or decision shall be final, is valid, without
prejudice to Articles 2038, 2039 and 2040." (Emphasis
supplied.)
• The arbitration clause was mutually and voluntarily agreed upon
by the parties. It has not been shown to be contrary to any law, or
against morals, good customs, public order, or public policy.
There has been no showing that the parties have not dealt with
each other on equal footing. We find no reason why the
arbitration clause should not be respected and complied with by
both parties.
• In Gonzales v. Climax Mining Ltd., we held that submission to
arbitration is a contract and that a clause in a contract providing
that all matters in dispute between the parties shall be referred to
arbitration is a contract.
• Again in Del Monte Corporation-USA v. Court of Appeals, we
likewise ruled that "[t]he provision to submit to arbitration any
dispute arising therefrom and the relationship of the parties is
part of that contract and is itself a contract.
• Arbitration clause not contrary to public policy
• The arbitration clause which stipulates that the
arbitration must be done in Seoul, Korea in
accordance with the Commercial Arbitration Rules of
the KCAB, and that the arbitral award is final and
binding, is not contrary to public policy. This Court has
sanctioned the validity of arbitration clauses in
a catena of cases.
• In the 1957 case ofEastboard Navigation Ltd. v. Juan
Ysmael and Co., Inc., -- an arbitration clause to
resolve differences and breaches of mutually agreed
contractual terms is valid.
• In BF Corporation v. Court of Appeals, --"[i]n this
jurisdiction, arbitration has been held valid and
constitutional.
• Even before the approval on June 19, 1953 of
Republic Act No. 876, this Court has countenanced the
settlement of disputes through arbitration. Republic Act
No. 876 was adopted to supplement the New Civil
Code’s provisions on arbitration.
RA 9285 incorporated the UNCITRAL Model law
to which we are a signatory
In case a foreign arbitral body is chosen by the parties,
the arbitration rules of our domestic arbitration bodies would not
be applied. As signatory to the Arbitration Rules of the UNCITRAL
Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration of the United
Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) in
the New York Convention on June 21, 1985, the Philippines
committed itself to be bound by the Model Law. We have even
incorporated the Model Law in Republic Act No. (RA) 9285,
otherwise known as the Alternative Dispute Resolution Act of
2004 entitled An Act to Institutionalize the Use of an Alternative
Dispute Resolution System in the Philippines and to Establish the
Office for Alternative Dispute Resolution, and for Other Purposes,
promulgated on April 2, 2004. Secs. 19 and 20 of Chapter 4 of the
Model Law
• While RA 9285 was passed only in 2004, it nonetheless applies
in the instant case since it is a procedural law which has a
retroactive effect. Likewise, KOGIES filed its application for
arbitration before the KCAB on July 1, 1998 and it is still
pending because no arbitral award has yet been rendered.
Thus, RA 9285 is applicable to the instant case. Well-settled is
the rule that procedural laws are construed to be applicable to
actions pending and undetermined at the time of their passage,
and are deemed retroactive in that sense and to that extent. As
a general rule, the retroactive application of procedural laws
does not violate any personal rights because no vested right
has yet attached nor arisen from them.
• Among the pertinent features of RA 9285 applying
and incorporating the UNCITRAL Model Law are
the following:

(1) The RTC must refer to arbitration in proper

cases
• Under Sec. 24, the RTC does not have jurisdiction over
disputes that are properly the subject of arbitration
pursuant to an arbitration clause, and mandates the
referral to arbitration in such cases
(2) Foreign arbitral awards must be confirmed by
the RTC
• Foreign arbitral awards while mutually stipulated by the
parties in the arbitration clause to be final and binding are
not immediately enforceable or cannot be implemented
immediately. Sec. 35 of the UNCITRAL Model Law
stipulates the requirement for the arbitral award to be
recognized by a competent court for enforcement, which
court under Sec. 36 of the UNCITRAL Model Law may
refuse recognition or enforcement on the grounds provided
for. RA 9285 incorporated these provisos to Secs. 42, 43,
and 44 relative to Secs. 47 and 48
(3) The RTC has jurisdiction to review foreign
arbitral awards
• -Sec. 42 in relation to Sec. 45 of RA 9285 designated and vested
the RTC with specific authority and jurisdiction to set aside,
reject, or vacate a foreign arbitral award on grounds provided
under Art. 34(2) of the UNCITRAL Model Law.
(4) Grounds for judicial review different in
domestic and foreign arbitral awards
(5) RTC decision of assailed foreign arbitral
award appealable
• - Sec. 46 of RA 9285 provides for an appeal before
the CA as the remedy of an aggrieved party in cases
where the RTC sets aside, rejects, vacates, modifies,
or corrects an arbitral award
• RTC has interim jurisdiction to protect the rights
of the parties
TUNA PROCESSING,INC., vs.
PHILIPPINE KINGFORD,INC.,
G.R. No. 185582
February 29, 2012
• Can a foreign corporation not licensed to do
business in the Philippines, but which
collects royalties from entities in the
Philippines, sue here to enforce a foreign
arbitral award?
• In this Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule
45, petitioner Tuna Processing, Inc. (TPI), a foreign corporation
not licensed to do business in the Philippines, prays that the
Resolution dated 21 November 2008 of the Regional Trial Court
(RTC) of Makati City be declared void and the case be
remanded to the RTC for further proceedings.
• In the assailed Resolution, the RTC dismissed
petitioner’s Petition for Confirmation, Recognition, and
Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Award against respondent
Philippine Kingford, Inc. (Kingford), a corporation duly organized
and existing under the laws of the Philippines, on the ground
that petitioner lacked legal capacity to sue.
• Issue
The core issue in this case is whether or not
the court a quo was correct in so dismissing
the petition on the ground of petitioner’s lack
of legal capacity to sue.

• Ruling
The petition is impressed with merit.
• Without doubt, the Corporation Code is the general law
providing for the formation, organization and regulation of
private corporations.

• Following the same principle, the Alternative Dispute

Resolution Act of 2004 shall apply in this case as the Act, as its
title - An Act to Institutionalize the Use of an Alternative Dispute
Resolution System in the Philippines and to Establish the
Office for Alternative Dispute Resolution, and for Other
Purposes - would suggest, is a law especially enacted "to
actively promote party autonomy in the resolution of disputes or
the freedom of the party to make their own arrangements to
resolve their disputes." It specifically provides exclusive
grounds available to the party opposing an application for
recognition and enforcement of the arbitral award
• In as much as the Alternative Dispute Resolution
Act of 2004, a municipal law, applies in the instant
petition, we do not see the need to discuss
compliance with international obligations under
the New York Convention and the Model Law. After
all, both already form part of the law.
• Clearly, not one of these exclusive grounds
touched on the capacity to sue of the party
seeking the recognition and enforcement of
the award.
• Pertinent provisions of the Special Rules of
Court on Alternative Dispute
Resolution, which was promulgated by the
Supreme Court, likewise support this
position.
• Premises considered, petitioner TPI, although not licensed to do
business in the Philippines, may seek recognition and
enforcement of the foreign arbitral award in accordance with the
provisions of the Alternative Dispute Resolution Act of 2004.
• ll considered, petitioner TPI, although a foreign corporation not
licensed to do business in the Philippines, is not, for that reason
alone, precluded from filing the Petition for Confirmation,
Recognition, and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Award before
a Philippine court.
• WHEREFORE, the Resolution dated 21 November 2008 of the
Regional Trial Court, Branch 61, Makati City in Special
Proceedings No. M-6533 is hereby REVERSED and SET
ASIDE. The case is REMANDED to Branch 61 for further
proceedings.
 COURT ANNEXED MEDIATION
IN THE PHILIPPINE MEDIATION CENTER
JUDICIAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION
Arbitration, from the Latin word arbitrari
meaning to give decision, is a process by
which parties to a dispute submit their
differences to the binding judgment of an
impartial third person or group selected by
mutual consent. (August,1993 p. 103)