Developed during a Seminar on Alternative Dispute Resolution for Commercial Disputes 

Recommendations of the Workshop

on the Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution for Commercial Disputes

Given the existing need for more efficient resolution of disputes in the Ukrainian society andwith due regard to the UNCITRAL arbitration rules, the participants of the Workshop on the Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution for Commercial Disputes hereby make the following recommendations:

• There should be a law on mediation.
• The Ukrainian legislation should contain a provision enabling the courts to take into account contract mediation clauses.
• There should be a regular platform for communication of experts on arbitration, mediation and other alternative methods of dispute resolution. The network of expertsestablished at this workshop should continue their cooperation and should reconvene in the future on a regular basis within workshops or other forms of collaboration. The program of collaboration should encompass, inter alia, detailed review of mediation and arbitration issues in special areas.
• The participants recognize the need for raising awareness of the importance and usefulness of ADR through the education of government officials, lawyers, business community and the general publicthrough workshops, media coverage, etc.
• There should be a self-governed association of mediators.
• Workshop participants recognize the usefulness of standards of quality of mediation services and of mediation training.
• The number of court instances on the cancellation of arbitration decisions and permission of execution of arbitration decisions should be decreased.
• Legislation should be created to regulate the review by competent courts of arbitration decisions on the ground of competence of arbitral tribunals.
• The existing legislation should be amended to allow for injunctive relief support of arbitration proceedings by competent courts.
• Rules should be created to ensure that competent courts help arbitral tribunals obtain evidence.
• The existing restriction of the use of domestic arbitration envisaged in Law On Arbitration Courts, Article 6, should be reviewed.
• The legislation on the review of arbitration decisions and issue of execution documents by competent courts should be amended to prevent double review of the same issue.