Court versus Arbitration Proceedings: Do You Know How to Tackle Business Disputes Efficiently?

Most probably, all entrepreneurs have experienced some kind of business conflict in conducting their day-to-day business. Even though some industries are more prone to dispute than others, all businesses, from the smallest family firms up to large multinational corporations have to deal with disputes. Business conflicts that go much further beyond the regular terms may even jeopardise a firm’s existence per se. Therefore, there is a question of how to tackle such disputes efficiently.

As the saying goes, forewarned is forearmed. And the same applies to business disputes. Strictly speaking, even contract structuring as the starting point may affect whether proceedings will occur in the future and how their actual course will be. However, a well prepared contract may not be a sufficient preventative means. As contractual compliance by both parties is what matters. Also, the selection of the business partner with whom the deal is made is of vital importance, for instance with regard to the business partner’s reputation and history. Furthermore, it is essential to put in place appropriate warrants and guarantees such as contractual fines or bank guarantees prior to contract conclusion and to take into account whether the contractual performance or the agreed guarantee can be collected and enforced from the contractual partner if necessary.

A dispute’s life cycle, or how to reach seizure in five steps

  1. Contractual phase (selection of the contractual partner, stipulation of the contractual terms, etc);
  2. Phase prior to the dispute (compliance with statutory and contractual terms, etc);
  3. Phase prior to the start of proceedings (dispute identification, assessment of the procedural situation, etc);
  4. Procedural phase (course of the proceedings as such, focus on their efficiency); and
  5. Ruling execution phase (seizure, acknowledgement on an international basis, ruling execution, etc).

In the event that all measures fail and proceedings are inevitable, special attention ought to be paid to the decision whether the dispute shall be tackled by way of court proceedings or arbitration proceedings. Both these alternatives have advantages and disadvantages. However, the actual aptness of one or another depends on the aspects of the actual case. Generally speaking, arbitration proceedings are faster. Moreover, thanks to the option to select the arbiter, the proficiency factor is secured. On the other hand, court proceedings are generally less costly and provide legal coercive means (such as witness summons).

Non-public, less costly, or fast?

Major differences between regular court proceedings and arbitration proceedings:


  • Public
  • Generally slower
  • No option to select the judge (ie absence of specific proficiency)
  • Formal
  • Lower expenses
  • Coercive means (such as witness summons)
  • Limited enforceability abroad (especially outside the EU)
  • Legal remedies (ie better foreseeability of the ruling)
  • Lower degree of confidence in national courts in international transactions


  • Non-public
  • Generally fast (the option of fast-track proceedings)
  • An option to select the arbiter (that possesses the relevant proficiency)
  • Flexible procedural rules
  • Greater expenses (in particular for international arbitration proceedings outside the Czech Republic)
  • Limited number of coercive means
  • Greater ruling enforceability abroad, in line with the New York Convention
  • Limited options for remedying poor-quality/surprising rulings

In addition, international disputes are a special category. In resolving international disputes, arbitration proceedings are the rather more apt option, as enforceability under arbitration proceedings is covered by the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, which is internationally valid. In assessing international disputes, foreign legal systems are the most critical factor. However, frequently, the legal systems are different from the domestic jurisdictions of the dispute parties. Another significant aspect in resolving international disputes includes genuine commercial practice. And last but not least, the equity principle may be applied in resolving international disputes, which is based on the general understanding and interpretation of justice. Moreover, similarly as in “domestic” arbitrations, the possibility of the lack of the arbiter’s impartiality is a threat to international arbitrations.

Are you planning on concluding a contract with a potential business partner, but do not feel confident about his reliability? Or do you have a large number of business partners and wish to verify them all at once? Use support via the Maják software instrument by Deloitte that will help you with ongoing checks of your vendors and customers.

The article is part of dReport – August 2019, Legal news.

Deloitte Legal Deloitte Maják Contractor dReport newsletter

What Does the RTS on SCA Bring with Regard to Statutory Audits?

Regulatory technical standards for strong customer authentication (the “RTS to SCA”), which entered into force on 14 September 2019, brought about a number of new obligations to payment service providers, including banks and payment institutions. Although the media mention, in particular, new obligations related to the requirements for strong customer authentication, in particular when initiating electronic payments (whether it is card payments in the store, the purchase of goods in an e-shop, entering an order in online banking or other acts), which must newly be a two-factor one (i.e. consisting of a combination of two or more elements from the category of ‘knowledge’, ‘possession’ and ‘inherence’), the above regulation also brings about new obligations of a purely internal nature. Specifically, the obligation to carry out internal audits, namely the audit of security measures (“audit of security measures”) as well as an audit of the way in which the so-called transaction risk analysis (“TRA audit”) is carried out. What are these two types of audits about and what is their substance? 

25. 11. 2019
Technology  Law 

Personal Data Processing News

This time we focus on the most important findings from the published information regarding inspections and decisions of the Office for Personal Data Protection in the first half of 2019. We are also reporting on further development concerning codes of conduct and certifications, on the procedure in the event of a security breach and procedure for informing customers about personal data processing, on an important decision related to cookies, and on an effort to unify the procedure for issuing penalties in Germany, and possibly the whole EU. 

22. 11. 2019

Filing a Motion with the Office for the Protection of Competition Will Be Free of Charge Again

On 13 November 2019, the Constitutional Court announced a major ruling in the area of public procurement, which will have a significant impact on the review of procurement procedures by the public. It is now possible again to file motions with the Office for the Protection of Competition regarding errors in public tenders without the necessity to pay the administrative charge of CZK 10,000. 

21. 11. 2019