The BIA Arbitration Court takes pride in its arbitrators. Today, we introduce Ana Milenkova.
Ana Milenkova graduated in Law from Sofia University “St. Kliment Ohridski” and holds two additional qualifications in financial law: a specialized programme for lawyers offered by the International Monetary Fund (1996 and 1998) and a qualification for arbitrators from the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators in the United Kingdom (2005).
During the first six years of her career, she worked as in-house counsel for a major agricultural complex. She subsequently spent ten years as Chief Arbitrator at the Silistra State Arbitration Court, where she adjudicated commercial disputes of all kinds and gained extensive practical experience.
Between 1991 and 1997, she served as a Member of Parliament in the 36th and 37th National Assemblies of the Republic of Bulgaria, which adopted a number of major laws redefining the role of the state in the economy. In addition to legislation concerning privatization, restitution, concessions, non-performing loans and the protection of citizens’ bank deposits, Ana Milenkova was actively involved in drafting and adopting the Bulgarian Commerce Act, particularly its provisions on commercial transactions and insolvency. She also participated in the amendment of the International Commercial Arbitration Act, which extended the use of the Act’s arbitration procedure to domestic disputes between Bulgarian businesses – the so-called domestic arbitration.
For two terms, from 1994 to 2002, Ana Milenkova was a member of the Venice Commission for Democracy through Law of the Council of Europe, which worked on the harmonization of legislation in European countries during the period of emerging democracies in Eastern Europe. As part of the Commission’s work, she contributed not only to the development of Bulgarian legislation, but also to the drafting of constitutional legislation in Ukraine, Albania and Poland.
Since 1997, Ana Milenkova has practiced as a lawyer and has also served as an insolvency administrator. She has acted as an insolvency administrator for approximately 80 companies, including Kremikovtzi, Armimex, Darko and ZMM-Technotronica.
Here is what else Ana Milenkova shared about her experience:
I worked with Professor Zhivko Stalev on the amendment to the International Commercial Arbitration Act that extended its procedure to domestic disputes between Bulgarian businesses, and I am proud of that work.
The 1993 amendment to the Act was particularly important because it enabled the transfer of dispute resolution from the exclusive sphere of the state and established a voluntary procedure through which the parties could choose to resolve their disputes through arbitration rather than state courts, with the arbitrator selected by the parties themselves.
This, in turn, made it possible for disputes to be heard by lawyers with many years of experience in specific fields and a proven high level of expertise. Arbitration proceedings are generally resolved more quickly than cases before the heavily burdened state courts. Arbitration fees are also lower, which provides a financial advantage to the parties involved in a dispute.
How long have you been an arbitrator?
I served as an arbitrator in the State Arbitration Court for ten years. Before 1991, the State Arbitration Court was essentially the equivalent of what are now the commercial divisions of the courts, because it was a state institution that adjudicated commercial disputes. At that time, the courts dealt primarily with civil disputes between individuals, as well as criminal cases.
Since 1997 (already 26 years) I have served as an arbitrator in voluntary, non-state arbitration proceedings. For the past seven years, I have also been an arbitrator at the BIA Arbitration Court.
What attracted you to arbitration?
Arbitration is, in fact, the field in which I have spent the greatest part of my professional life. I admit that I have always approached this work with particular dedication and a strong sense of responsibility.
Imagine the responsibility that comes with a business placing its trust in you and selecting you as the person it believes will resolve its dispute in the most appropriate and lawful manner. That is one of the great advantages of arbitration: the parties themselves have a say in selecting their arbitrator.
What are the most common challenges in arbitration proceedings?
There are no real difficulties inherent in the arbitration procedure. It is less cumbersome than the procedure under the Civil Procedure Code. For example, it does not impose the same strict procedural deadlines and preclusion rules concerning the submission and collection of evidence that apply in court proceedings.
Arbitration is a highly democratic procedure. The atmosphere is also much more collegial. And there is no dispute that cannot be resolved.
When does the resolution of a dispute bring satisfaction to the parties and to you as an arbitrator?
I believe that the resolution of an arbitration dispute should always bring satisfaction to both the parties and the arbitrators.
The arbitrator is the person who establishes the “diagnosis” of the dispute, in the presence of highly qualified professionals representing the parties. Naturally, this is a task carrying a very high degree of responsibility. Good legal professionals recognize when the correct diagnosis has been made and are prepared to accept the consequences and the appropriate “treatment” of the legal relationship.
If, on the other hand, the diagnosis is incorrect, the law provides, under specific conditions, for the extraordinary remedy of setting aside an arbitral award by the Supreme Court of Cassation.
What advice would you give to companies facing unresolved commercial disputes?
I would advise them not to hesitate to use arbitration to resolve their disputes. It offers the opportunity to have their case decided by qualified legal professionals, through a procedure chosen by the parties themselves and without the same procedural restrictions on the presentation of evidence that apply in court proceedings.
Arbitration is also less costly than proceedings before state courts and offers a faster way of resolving disputes.
To make this possible, the parties should include an arbitration agreement when entering into the relevant contract. Alternatively, they may conclude a separate arbitration agreement before submitting the dispute to arbitration. Under certain circumstances, they may also agree to resolve the dispute through arbitration at the very beginning of the arbitration proceedings.
