PETYA MURGOVA: ARBITRATION IS A FAST AND EFFECTIVE WAY TO RESOLVE DISPUTES

Petya Murgova is a lawyer and mediator with more than 30 years of professional experience. She holds a degree in Law from Sofia University “St. Kliment Ohridski”. She is Managing Partner of the Balkan Association for Dispute Resolution and Founder and Managing Partner of Murgova & Partners Law Firm, a leading law firm with more than 15 years of experience advising international and Bulgarian clients on a broad range of matters, including corporate and commercial law, mergers and acquisitions, public procurement, healthcare and pharmaceuticals, real estate and construction, as well as litigation and arbitration.

Her areas of expertise include dispute resolution and litigation, negotiations, mergers and acquisitions, corporate group structuring, healthcare and pharmaceutical law, trade secret protection, real estate and construction law, and copyright.

Petya Murgova is also a member of the Public Council of the “St. St. Cyril and Methodius” National Library.

She has served as an arbitrator at the BIA Arbitration Court since 2016. We asked her to share her views and experience in arbitration.

What attracted you to arbitration?

Arbitration is a fast and effective way of resolving disputes outside the courts, offering considerable procedural flexibility. It is particularly well suited to commercial disputes, as it provides the parties with timely, reliable and effective protection. In disputes involving significant financial interests, arbitration can also be more cost-effective. Another important advantage is the opportunity to have a dispute resolved by arbitrators with strong professional expertise, integrity and high ethical standards.

What are the most common challenges in arbitration proceedings?

As a private-law method of dispute resolution, arbitration does not have the direct coercive powers available to state authorities. Potential challenges may therefore arise where the assistance of state courts or public authorities is required, as arbitrators have comparatively limited powers to compel compliance with certain obligations, for example, requiring a witness to appear or ordering a party to produce a document in its possession.

At the same time, the rules governing the burden of proof provide a strong incentive for the parties themselves to present the necessary evidence and substantiate their respective positions.

The single-instance nature of arbitration also presents a potential risk: an arbitrator may make an error in resolving a dispute, without the possibility of a conventional appeal on the merits. Furthermore, given the limited and specific grounds on which an arbitral award may be set aside, a party may ultimately remain bound by an award that it considers to be flawed.

When does the resolution of a dispute bring satisfaction to the parties and to you as an arbitrator?

When a dispute is resolved in accordance with both the letter and the spirit of the law, and when the proceedings reflect a high level of professionalism on the part of both the arbitrators and the parties’ legal representatives.

What advice would you give to companies facing unresolved commercial disputes?

I would encourage companies to consider arbitration as an effective means of resolving commercial disputes and, importantly, to include a well-drafted arbitration clause in their commercial agreements from the outset.