It is a general rule in Danish law is that civil disputes can be settled by the courtsArbitration is an alternative option to the general rule that disputes are to be decided by the courts. An arbitration requires, in contrast to the courts, that the parties by agreement agree t let the dispute to arbitration. The parties have concluded an agreement to a particular dispute or any future disputes in a particular legal relationship shall be settled by arbitration, the agreement, that the dispute should not be resolved by the courts, but, on the other hand, by the parties agreement established the permanent court of arbitration.
The tribunal consists of one or more arbitrators, as the parties themselves choose.
Arbitration is thus characterized by the fact that the parties instead of going to court reduces the private law, the arbitral tribunal, which shall decide the dispute with binding effect for the parties. The basis for this is the between the parties concluded a special agreement. The tribunal can either be established through a commerce or on a stand alone basis. An agreement for arbitration shall be inserted frequently in the contracts, why arbitration usually will be agreed upon before the dispute arises.
However, the parties have also to agree on arbitration after the dispute has arisen.
The arbitral tribunal hears the dispute in accordance with the guidelines, which the parties have agreed to the treatment. The parties have chosen institutional arbitration is used, as a rule, the selected institution's rules of procedure, while the parties by ad hoc arbitration which in most cases uses some standardprocedureregler. The arbitral tribunal shall decide the matter by order, and order, like a judgment of the courts, be enforced by the bailiff's court. The parties have the possibility to appoint arbitrators that have special knowledge in the subject matter, the dispute concerned. While the judges of the courts in general are generalists, and opens the arbitration to establish a private court composed of specialists. Arbitration takes place behind closed doors, while the civil administration of justice by the courts is based on a offentlighedsprincip, which as a rule is free access to the deliberations of the court. ex. competitors and the press do not get familiar with the case. The arbitration award is final In contrast to court proceedings, where a judgment as overriding a rule may be appealed, the parties agree in an arbitration virtually undtagelsesfrit that the order is final and cannot be appealed to an ”appeal”-the court of arbitration. Voldgiftskendelsens finality implies that disputes everything else just gets faster settled by arbitration than by on the merits, because often time-consuming appeal are cut off. Like the courts voldgiftsretterne the applicable law However, in contrast to the courts, which must decide disputes according to law, by arbitration agreement that the arbitral tribunal shall decide the case on the basis of equity, ie. freer considerations, including what the tribunal considers to be reasonable and fair in the concrete case. An arbitration can not be appealed, and this may be perceived as inappropriate by the losing party, if it considers that the arbitration award is wrong.
This prevented the losing party from having the case judged on the new.
The lack of provision for appeal does not mean, however, that there is the opportunity to get the award disregarded as invalid, but it can be experienced as a problem in the ”intermediate range”, between ”wrong” and invalid arbitral awards. Process costs especially in the smaller cases to be excessive by arbitration. This is due to the parties must pay the arbitral fee, why only larger cases can usually bear the arbitration costs and expenses. Arbitration can be a problem for retsudviklingen, because voldgiftprocessens confidential nature, involve the public, including retsanvenderne, do not get the knowledge of the present case the arbitration awards.