December 14 of this year will mark the five-year anniversary of the Rules on the Efficient Conduct of Proceedings in International Arbitration, more colloquially referred to as the Prague Rules. These, hailed as transformative by many in the legal world, came to be in the grandeur of the 17th Century Renaissance Martinic Palace in Prague.
It was here that Vladimir Khvalei, Chairman of the Board of the Russian Arbitration Association, announced the adoption of the Prague Rules, offering them as a solution to the so-called problem of the “Creaping Americanization of International Arbitration”. The legal professionals working to draft the Prague Rules saw this Americanization as a significant concern for the practice of international arbitration.
Yet, what has become of the Prague Rules five years after their prestigious introduction? Do they hold the sway initially touted? Or have these rules been overshadowed by the strategies and tactics born from Americanisation? Has the Prague Rules’ mission to shift global arbitration toward a more inquisitorial approach been successful?
These are pertinent questions for any corporate legal professional involved in international litigation, especially those still grappling with the implications of these rules on their international arbitration proceedings.
The answers to these questions will become clearer as we continue to monitor the impact of the Prague Rules in the global litigation landscape. Irrespective of this, they remain a relevant topic of discussion, and a reminder of the ongoing dynamic interplay between different strands of legal thought in the realm of international arbitration.