ICC and SCC Arbitration Within Georgian Law
Choosing the ICC — the International Chamber of Commerce — or the SCC — the Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce — is one of the common decisions in international transactions. The Georgian Law on Arbitration frames such administered arbitration with a general but important framework: the parties themselves determine the basic parameters of the procedure, while the law at the same time supplies the disciplinary safeguards that overlay the institution’s rules — on the composition of the tribunal, the form of the hearing and the deadline for the award.
For Georgian counterparties this means that choosing the ICC or the SCC in a contract works fully within Georgian law; what is worth deciding deliberately in the clause are the three matters the law addresses directly — the number of arbitrators, the form of the hearing and the time limit for rendering the award.
Number of Arbitrators: Three as the Statutory Default
Under the law, the arbitration consists of one or more arbitrators, and their number and the manner of appointment are determined by the parties. As a rule the parties appoint an equal number of arbitrators, unless they have agreed otherwise. But if the number of arbitrators is not determined by the parties’ agreement, the arbitration must be composed of three arbitrators — the configuration that traditionally dominates complex international cases, including ICC and SCC practice.
For an even number the law provides a balancing rule: if the arbitration agreement fixes an even number of arbitrators, the arbitrators already appointed are obliged, within 10 days of their appointment, to appoint one more arbitrator, unless the parties have agreed otherwise. Stating a three-member composition directly in the clause removes this uncertainty in advance and makes the process predictable.
Form of the Hearing: Oral or Documents Only
The law entrusts the form of the hearing to the parties: if the form is not determined by their agreement, the arbitration may conduct an oral examination of the evidence or examine the case on the basis of documents and other evidence alone. This lever is designed precisely for documentary cases: most international commercial disputes, where the facts are visible from the papers, can be resolved without oral sittings — with a notable saving of time and cost.
But the party’s guarantee is also in the law: at the request of either party the arbitration must conduct an oral hearing at any stage of the proceedings, except where the parties have waived the oral hearing. All hearings are, moreover, closed unless the law or the parties’ agreement provides otherwise: documents, evidence and statements submitted are not to be published or used in other proceedings, and the arbitrator and every participant must preserve the confidentiality of the information received — for business this is often one of the main reasons for choosing arbitration.