The BIA Arbitration Court takes pride in its arbitrators. Today, we introduce Prof. Georgi Dimitrov.
Prof. Georgi Dimitrov graduated in Law from Sofia University “St. Kliment Ohridski”. He holds a PhD in Law from KU Leuven in Belgium and is currently a professor at the University of Library Studies and Information Technologies (UNIBIT). In addition, he has been practicing law for 25 years and is the founder of Dimitrov, Petrov & Co. Law Firm, as well as the founder of the Law and Internet Foundation.
His professional practice focuses on legal issues relating to information technology. He has advised parliaments and governments in several countries and has participated as an expert in working groups of the European Commission and other European institutions on matters including electronic identification and the digital euro.
His current professional interests focus on electronic identification. He is the creator of Evrotrust, the first Bulgarian national electronic identification scheme notified to the European Commission, and currently serves as Chair of its Board of Directors.
Prof. Dimitrov has more than 15 years of experience as an arbitrator, including at the Czech Arbitration Court and the Arbitration Court of the Alliance for Legal Interaction. He has also been a member of the BIA Arbitration Court for the past year. Here is what he shared about his experience:
What attracted you to arbitration?
Arbitration is a major challenge, particularly for me. Stepping out of the shoes of a lawyer and into the role of an arbitrator, who has to assess the merits of the parties’ arguments, the relevance of the evidence and how the dispute should be viewed through the framework of the applicable legal rules, requires an entirely different set of skills.
At the same time, arbitration contributes significantly to a lawyer’s professional development. It teaches you to understand different perspectives, develop your analytical and logical thinking, and approach every individual arbitration dispute with impartiality.
What are the most common challenges in arbitration proceedings?
At first glance, arbitration proceedings may appear relatively straightforward because they follow a simpler procedural framework than the often complex rules governing court proceedings. They are generally more dynamic and faster, can be conducted entirely electronically and, ultimately, are significantly less costly than court proceedings.
Another advantage is that the parties themselves have a role in selecting the arbitrator or arbitral tribunal.
On the other hand, however, arbitration is a considerably more demanding process because it is generally conducted at a single instance, with no ordinary appeal on the merits. This places a significantly greater responsibility on arbitrators.
Furthermore, where the parties agree to depart from the established rules of an institutional arbitration, the resulting procedural arrangements are sometimes incomplete, inconsistent or insufficiently logical. This can create additional difficulties for arbitrators in carrying out their functions.
The inability to compel witnesses who are not brought forward by the parties can also be a challenge, because an arbitral tribunal does not have the coercive powers of the state to compel a witness to appear in the proceedings.
We all know that, in many cases, witness testimony can be crucial to establishing the merits of the parties’ claims and defences.
When does the resolution of a dispute bring satisfaction to the parties and to you as an arbitrator?
To be completely honest, every dispute that is successfully resolved brings me personal satisfaction because each case represents a professional challenge.
Of course, I can also say when I do not feel satisfied: when an analysis of the facts makes it clear how the legal relationship has developed, but one of the parties is unable to substantiate its position with evidence.
In such circumstances, the arbitrator must render the award on the basis of the evidence presented, rather than simply relying on his or her own personal conviction about what actually happened. In those cases, I certainly feel a sense of dissatisfaction.
What advice would you give to companies facing unresolved commercial disputes?
I can wholeheartedly recommend that companies involved in commercial disputes take advantage of this remarkably flexible dispute-resolution mechanism that commercial arbitration offers.
The BIA Arbitration Court has an exceptionally strong roster of arbitrators, with highly accomplished professionals whose expertise provides confidence that disputes will be resolved competently and fairly.
The lower costs associated with arbitration proceedings are also of significant importance to businesses.
Very often, arbitration can help preserve the commercial relationship between the parties, even after an arbitral award has been rendered, precisely because the parties themselves have the opportunity to select the arbitrator they trust.
For this reason, including an arbitration clause in commercial contracts with business partners is a significant advantage – one that companies are unlikely to regret.
