International Arbitration 2023 Comparisons

In Albania, international arbitration is the predominant method employed by parties engaged in the implementation and operation of concessions, particularly those related to the exploitation of natural resources or other significant transactions involving state authorities. This choice is motivated by the desire to safeguard against potential arbitrary rulings by domestic courts, especially in cases where one of the parties is a state-owned entity or a public institution. Moreover, the timing aspect also plays a crucial role in the selection of international arbitration, as it is deemed to be more efficient in such circumstances.

It is worth noting that the current domestic legislation does not offer specific regulations on arbitration. The Civil Procedure Code underwent a recent reform wherein the relevant provisions pertaining to arbitration were abolished, awaiting the approval of a new arbitration law. Although the initial draft of this law was prepared in 2015, it has undergone revisions since then and is yet to be approved by the parliament. Even when the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code were in effect, domestic parties did not commonly resort to or prefer arbitration as a method of dispute resolution. This preference can be attributed to the local mindset, which tends to prioritise seeking justice over seeking expedient solutions to problems.

When parties opt for international arbitration, they predominantly do so for its effectiveness in resolving disputes and enforcing arbitral awards. Contrary to popular belief, the choice of the seat of arbitration is not the primary consideration for the inclusion of an arbitration clause in contracts with state authorities. Albania is rarely chosen as a seat, and only when accommodating the state authority during negotiation of the arbitration clause.

During the aforementioned period, the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) has emerged as a widely utilised form of international arbitration by parties who have experienced interference from state authorities during contract execution. Similarly, in the realm of commercial arbitration, the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) is the most frequently employed institution, especially among industries involved in natural resource extraction.

The primary rationale behind this preference stems from the international nature of these industries, which are often operated by foreign investors. Given that the contracts involved are predominantly concession agreements, as mentioned earlier, the inclusion of an international arbitration clause ensures a more secure relationship with state authorities. It is worth noting that the economic crisis has had an impact on businesses, but it is equally important to acknowledge that the government’s conduct may be perceived as assertive.

The increasing demand for international arbitration can be attributed primarily to the ongoing reform of the judicial system in Albania, which has adversely affected the timely and efficient processing of cases. Even local investors demonstrate a greater inclination towards negotiating the inclusion of international arbitration as a method for resolving disputes, as opposed to pursuing litigation in domestic courts. This trend is motivated by concerns regarding the professionalism and independence of the domestic judiciary, which is currently burdened by an overwhelming caseload.

ICSID and ICC are the preferred institutions among parties that include an international arbitration clause in their agreements. ICSID is predominantly utilised by foreign investors as a means to safeguard their investments. On the other hand, the International Chamber of Commerce is regarded as a suitable institution due to its esteemed reputation. Given that, in most cases, one of the parties to the arbitration agreement is the government, the ICC is perceived as a more appropriate choice. As for private domestic parties, arbitration between them is a rare occurrence, and when it does happen, they often opt for foreign arbitration under a specific jurisdiction due to pre-existing relationships or the location of the arbitration seat.

Regrettably, Albania currently lacks an established arbitral institution that fulfils the requirements of the legislation, as there is a dearth of relevant legal provisions. While a private institution has been registered, it cannot effectively operate without the necessary legislative framework in place. As mentioned earlier, a draft law has been in preparation since 2015, and it is anticipated that it will soon receive approval from the Parliament of the Republic of Albania.

There are no specialised courts in Albania solely dedicated to arbitration matters. However, concerning the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards, the Code of Civil Procedure specifies that the Court of Appeals in Tirana has jurisdiction in handling such proceedings. In the context of the new draft law, the competencies of the District Court are outlined, particularly with regard to procedural matters. This includes the appointment of arbitrators and matters pertaining to the validity of international arbitration agreements. Additionally, provisions are made for the review of arbitral decisions in specific cases where certain criteria are met.

The ongoing process of approving the draft law has drawn inspiration from the UNCITRAL Model Law. Due to the prolonged duration of its approval, the draft has undergone various modifications and received numerous comments. Some drafts were presented in complete adherence to the provisions of the Model Law, while others deviated from its provisions. The current version of the draft law aligns approximately 80% with the provisions of the Model Law.

The most recent iteration of the draft law maintains a similar structure to that of the Model Law. However, certain aspects are not fully elucidated, and in instances where there is no agreement between the parties on procedural rules, court intervention may be broader in scope.

The provisions regarding arbitration in the Republic of Albania, previously outlined in articles 400 to 441 of the Code of Civil Procedure, were nullified through amendments implemented in 2013. Since then, there has been an expectation for a new draft law to be enacted. As mentioned earlier, several draft versions have been deliberated among the parties involved in the process. While certain drafts were titled “Arbitration in the RA”, the existing draft primarily addresses international arbitration within the Republic of Albania.

According to the most recent draft law, written agreements or arbitration clauses hold enforceable status. The legal criteria for their validity are aligned with those outlined in international instruments ratified by the Republic of Albania. Albania is a party to various international instruments, ranging from the Convention on Private International Law (UNCITRAL) to the New York and Geneva Conventions, among others. Moreover, the principles of our private law pertaining to the validity of agreements are also taken into account if a challenge regarding the validity of such agreements is brought before national courts.

According to the latest draft law, matters involving economic interests are generally excluded from arbitration. These matters are those for which Albanian courts possess exclusive jurisdiction, as outlined in domestic legislation, particularly the law on International Private Law.

As a general principle, commercial disputes and civil cases are considered arbitrable. This encompasses various commercial practices and issues, as well as non-commercial civil cases. In instances involving concessions or other significant transactions, the scope of arbitral matters typically revolves around claims for damages. However, cases falling within the realm of exclusive jurisdiction or involving sovereign issues are not subject to alternative jurisdictions, including international arbitration.

There have been instances, which have also been deliberated by the Supreme Court of Albania, wherein decisions have been rendered in favour of upholding and enforcing arbitration agreements.

In accordance with the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code, if a domestic court is presented with a case that falls under the purview of international arbitration or any other form of arbitration, the court must acknowledge its lack of jurisdiction over the matter and refer it to the appropriate arbitration institution. Once this decision is finalised, the parties are precluded from resubmitting the same matter to the same court.

As previously discussed, Albania currently lacks specific regulations pertaining to international arbitration. However, as a party to international instruments governing this method of dispute resolution, the prevailing approach remains consistent. Consequently, an arbitration agreement will remain valid and enforceable even if the main contract between the parties is deemed invalid. This principle is also incorporated in the most recent draft law.

Presently, there is a tendency within the legal community and among law professors to treat the arbitration clause as a separate entity. However, due to the limited practice in such cases, this matter warrants further reconsideration in the future, particularly once the law is enacted and the domestic parties exhibit an increased inclination toward embracing this method of dispute resolution.

The recent draft law adopts an approach that emphasises the utmost autonomy in the selection of arbitrators. This principle is reflected in the corresponding articles of the draft law, which outline the criteria that arbitrators must meet. The sole requirement stipulated is that arbitrators must be of legal age and possess the capacity to act. These provisions grant parties significant autonomy in choosing their arbitrators, with the only limitation being the application of the conflict of interest principle. This framework ensures a high degree of flexibility and freedom for the parties involved in the arbitration process.

As per the provisions of the draft law, in the event that the parties involved in arbitration proceedings are unable to appoint an arbitrator, the responsibility of selecting the arbitrator falls upon the court of first instance. The draft law offers more detailed explanations regarding the circumstances surrounding the failure to appoint an arbitrator.

Similar procedures are outlined in the draft law when it comes to cases involving multiple arbitrators. If the two arbitrators chosen by the parties are unable to reach an agreement on the selection of a third arbitrator, the authority to appoint the third arbitrator rests with the District Court.

These mechanisms are designed to ensure the smooth progress of arbitration proceedings and to provide a solution in cases where the parties encounter difficulties in appointing arbitrators or reaching consensus.

As previously mentioned, the intervention of the District Court is limited and occurs under specific circumstances. The court’s involvement occurs when the parties are unable to reach an agreement on the appointment of arbitrators, when there is a failure to appoint the third arbitrator with mutual agreement, or when a request for the removal of an arbitrator is submitted to the court. In such situations, the District Court may step in to address these issues and ensure the smooth progress of the arbitration proceedings.

The draft law, in Articles 15 and 16, stipulates the circumstances in which an arbitrator may be challenged or required to be removed. The grounds for challenging or removing an arbitrator can be specified in the arbitration agreement itself, a separate agreement reached by the parties, or when a request is submitted by one of the parties to the arbitration tribunal. In such cases, the arbitration tribunal itself is responsible for making a decision on the challenge or removal, and this decision can be subject to appeal in court.

An arbitrator may be removed if they are deemed incompetent or incapable of fulfilling their duties. The decision to remove an arbitrator is based on their inability to effectively carry out their role and responsibilities.

Given the absence of a specific law on international arbitration in Albania, the rules of proceedings for the envisaged arbitration institution are yet to be established in accordance with the draft law. However, with reference to the current draft law, certain provisions outline the responsibilities of arbitrators, including the obligation to disclose any conflicts of interest or potential circumstances that may compromise their impartiality, once appointed.

Furthermore, the parties involved in the arbitration proceedings possess the right to request the removal of an arbitrator upon being informed of any impartiality or other circumstances that could undermine the arbitrator’s independence or professional competence. This right extends even to the party that originally appointed the arbitrator, should such circumstances arise subsequent to the arbitrator’s appointment.

In accordance with the provisions of the draft law, arbitration is applicable solely to matters involving an economic interest. However, as mentioned earlier, the law on Private International Law establishes certain cases in which exclusive jurisdiction is vested in the domestic courts.

These cases encompass the following:

• disputes concerning ownership rights and other rights over real estate, including matters related to rent and rights arising from the use of real estate against compensation, when such properties are located within the territory of the Republic of Albania;
• disputes pertaining to decisions made by the bodies of commercial companies, provided that the company’s registered seat is situated within the Republic of Albania;
• issues related to the establishment and dissolution of legal entities, as well as lawsuits concerning decisions made by their respective bodies, when the legal entity is domiciled in the Republic of Albania;
• matters concerning the validity of registrations in the registers of Albanian courts or state bodies;
• matters concerning the validity of registrations of intellectual property rights, provided that such registrations or requests for registrations were made within the Republic of Albania; and
• matters pertaining to the execution of enforceable titles within the territory of the Republic of Albania.

According to the provisions of the draft law, the arbitral tribunal itself possesses the authority to determine its own jurisdiction when a jurisdictional claim is raised by one of the parties. Subsequent to the ruling by the arbitral tribunal, the parties retain the right to appeal to the court. However, claims regarding the jurisdiction of the court must be submitted prior to or on the specified date for the delivery of the defence.

It is important to note that the examination of a case by the domestic court does not suspend the ongoing arbitration proceedings. The arbitration process continues independently, unaffected by the court’s involvement in the matter.

Based on domestic law and court practice, the primary duty of the courts is to verify their competence and jurisdiction over any claim brought before them. They will do this based on the evidence submitted by the parties, or on the parties’ claims.

However, if the parties have entered into an arbitration agreement, the courts will tend to dismiss the case due to a lack of jurisdiction. This is in accordance with a recent decision of the Supreme Court.

The courts are also competent to review or consider an appeal against a decision of the arbitral tribunal. The appeal can be submitted against both interim and final decisions of the arbitral tribunal.

As per the provisions of the recent draft law, a party has the right to challenge the jurisdiction of the tribunal, but this must be done no later than the submission of their defence. This implies that the challenge can be raised at any stage during the filing and constitution of the tribunal, but it cannot be raised after the submission of the party’s defence.

The draft law stipulates the application of the de novo standard when reviewing a matter pertaining to jurisdiction or admissibility. Under this standard, the reviewing body re-evaluates the issue independently and afresh, without deferring to the previous determination made by another entity or tribunal. This approach allows for a comprehensive reconsideration of the jurisdictional or admissibility aspects of the case, ensuring a thorough and impartial assessment.

Both the jurisprudence of the courts and the provisions outlined in the draft law align with the same principle, whereby cases are typically dismissed from the outset if the court lacks jurisdiction due to the existence of an arbitration agreement. In such instances, the courts refrain from considering the substantive claim and instead declare the absence of jurisdiction.

The courts demonstrate a reluctance to proceed with proceedings in cases where jurisdiction is lacking. Consequently, if the court determines that it lacks jurisdiction based on the presence of an arbitration agreement, the case is promptly dismissed at the outset.

Under national law, there is no provision that permits an arbitral tribunal to assert jurisdiction over individuals or entities that are not bound by the arbitration agreement or the contract in which the arbitration agreement is included. The jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal is limited to the parties who have explicitly consented to arbitration through the agreement or contract. The national law does not allow the tribunal to extend its jurisdiction beyond the scope of the agreement or contract to include non-consenting parties.

Indeed, in accordance with the latest draft law, the arbitral tribunal is granted the authority to render decisions on preliminary or interim relief. Such decisions carry binding effect. Preliminary or interim relief may be granted in cases where there is a likelihood of future damages or the risk of irreparable harm prior to the completion of the arbitration process. Additionally, interim relief may be awarded when there is a concern that the execution of a final decision could be jeopardised. The purpose of granting such relief is to ensure the protection of the parties’ rights and interests during the course of the arbitration proceedings.

The court possesses the authority to grant preliminary or interim relief in cases subject to arbitration, provided that it has jurisdiction over such measures in accordance with the Albanian Civil Procedure Code.

The same provision is outlined in the draft law, extending the authority to grant preliminary or interim relief to cases involving foreign-seated arbitration. In such cases, the court’s competence to issue such measures is contingent upon the provisions of the Albanian Civil Procedure Code.

It is important to note that the existing draft law does not include specific provisions regarding emergency arbitrators. However, it does incorporate provisions for the replacement of arbitrators, and the same rules pertaining to challenge and removal apply to these replacement arbitrators.

The allocation of costs in the arbitral proceedings is determined by the arbitral tribunal in its final decision. This provision is explicitly stated in the most recent version of the draft law, which previously lacked specific provisions on this matter. The tribunal has the authority to consider and settle the costs associated with the arbitration process as part of its final decision.

There is currently no legal framework concerning international arbitration in Albania. However, a draft law establishing an arbitration institution is expected to be enacted in the near future. Once this law is enacted, the arbitration institution will be empowered to formulate and approve the rules of proceedings governing arbitration cases.

The procedural steps in arbitration are determined by the parties themselves through the arbitration agreement. In the absence of specific provisions within the agreement, the procedures outlined in the applicable law, as specified in the agreement, are deemed applicable. It is important to note that the draft law incorporates provisions regarding the timing for various types of appeals, ensuring a structured framework for the resolution of disputes through arbitration.

The draft law establishes certain duties and rights for arbitrators within the competencies of the arbitral tribunal. Arbitrators are obligated to inform the parties involved in the arbitration process and, should circumstances arise that compromise their impartiality, such as conflicts of interest or other hindrances that impede their ability to fulfil their duties, they are required to withdraw from their position.

Conversely, arbitrators are granted the right to oversee the entirety of the arbitration process and render various types of decisions, including interim decisions, preliminary orders, and final decisions. These duties and rights serve as general guidelines outlined in the draft law to govern the conduct of arbitrators within the framework of the arbitral tribunal.

In accordance with the current national legislation, there are no specific provisions regarding the legal representation of parties, except for representation before the Supreme Court, which mandates the involvement of a licensed lawyer. It is worth noting that court proceedings are conducted in the Albanian language.

Regarding representation in an arbitration tribunal, the recent draft law does not impose any specific requirements or qualifications for legal representatives. Moreover, the arbitration process itself can be conducted in a foreign language, unless otherwise stipulated by an agreement between the parties. In the absence of such an agreement, the language used in the arbitration proceedings shall be Albanian until the parties reach a consensus on the applicable language. Consequently, there are no restrictions or limitations regarding the legal representation of parties in an arbitration proceeding under the provisions of the recent draft law.

In recognition of the vital role that evidence plays in civil proceedings, the legislature has explicitly outlined various permissible types of evidence that can be presented in such processes. These include:

• expert testimony or expertise;
• witness testimonies, subject to cross-examination;
• written evidence;
• admissions made by the parties; and
• examination and experimentation.

Specific rules and procedures have been stipulated by law for the acquisition of each of the aforementioned types of evidence. Additionally, general rules governing evidence administration can be found in Articles 213-224 of the Civil Procedure Code.

Generally, the court will admit the submission of evidence if it is deemed necessary to prove a particular claim or is relevant to specific arguments that are central to the case. However, the court may refuse the admission of evidence if it is determined to be unnecessary or irrelevant. There may also be instances when certain evidence is located outside the jurisdiction of the court responsible for examining the case. In such cases, the competent court delegates its authority to the court within the jurisdiction where the evidence is situated. This delegated court acts on behalf of the competent court to acquire the evidence. Alternatively, if all parties consent, one of the judges on the panel presiding over the case may assume this role instead of delegating it to a foreign court.

In situations where a witness is unable to hear or speak, the court requires the assistance of another person capable of understanding the witness’s signs or gestures. Additionally, if it is necessary to perform a procedural action outside the territory of the Republic of Albania, such as clarifying circumstances, assessing facts, or sending documents, the court may request legal assistance from the competent authority of the foreign country, with the intervention of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Albania.

To acquire evidence from other countries, Albanian courts engage in judicial assistance with foreign courts based on specific agreements entered into between them. Albanian courts may refuse to provide assistance to foreign courts in two cases: (i) when offering such assistance contravenes Albanian legal principles, or (ii) when the Albanian court lacks jurisdiction to comply with the request from the foreign court.

Furthermore, Article 223 of the Albanian Civil Procedure Code allows one party, during the civil legal process, to request the court to order a third party, who is not involved in the proceedings, to provide evidence that is of interest but unavailable to the requesting party, whether from an individual, legal entity, or state authority.

The parties exercise their autonomy by mutually agreeing upon the rules of proceedings, encompassing the collection and submission of evidence. Nevertheless, specific regulations exist for witnesses and experts. However, if the arbitration institution seeks assistance from the court, the Albanian Code of Procedures becomes applicable. Furthermore, in situations where there are no explicit rules governing the admissibility and administration of evidence, the provisions of domestic law are invoked.

Witnesses are typically called to testify either prior to or during the hearing in arbitration proceedings. In situations where the arbitration tribunal requires the court’s assistance in document production, evidence collection, or witness attendance, the court will exercise its competence in accordance with the relevant domestic rules of proceedings. The court’s decision in such cases holds the same binding force as all decisions issued by Albanian courts and is executed in compliance with the applicable domestic regulations.

Various drafts have included differing provisions regarding confidentiality in arbitration proceedings. However, the most recent version of the draft law does not encompass specific regulations pertaining to confidentiality. Consequently, it is left to the discretion of the parties to include confidentiality provisions in their agreement or arbitration clause.

Regarding subsequent proceedings, if the recognition of the arbitration award is sought, the issue of confidentiality may be subject to the applicable domestic rules of proceedings. Depending on the nature of the case, the confidentiality of the arbitration proceedings may be publicly acknowledged. The determination of whether confidentiality is maintained in subsequent proceedings will depend on the specific circumstances and considerations involved.

According to the latest version of the draft law, the decision rendered by the arbitral tribunal must be in written form and accompanied by a reasoning section. In cases where the tribunal consists of multiple arbitrators, the decision should be reached by a majority of the arbitrators. Furthermore, the decision is required to specify the date and place of its issuance.

Regarding the timeframe for delivering the award, the most recent version of the draft law does not provide explicit specifications. Instead, it is up to the parties to include provisions on the rules and timelines for the delivery of the award within their agreement or arbitration clause.

Time limits are prescribed for appealing both interim and final decisions; however, in this particular version of the law, there is no mandatory timeframe specified. It should be noted that in previous drafts, specific time limits were included for such appeals.

The most recent version of the law does not contain any provisions concerning the limitations and types of remedies available in arbitration. Consequently, the remedies that may be sought are determined by the applicable legislation agreed upon by the parties or by the requirements set forth in the domestic law. In the absence of specific provisions within the law, the remedies available in arbitration proceedings will be governed by the relevant provisions of the agreed-upon legislation or the applicable domestic law.

In the recent draft law, specific provisions are outlined regarding the allocation of costs and damages in certain situations. Firstly, in the event that costs and damages arise from the execution of an interim measure or an order of the tribunal that is subsequently revoked, the party responsible for such costs and damages is liable. The principle of costs follow the event is applicable in such cases.

Additionally, the draft law includes a provision addressing the cost of the arbitration itself. This encompasses all expenses related to the arbitration proceeding, including tribunal fees, arbitrator expenses, expert fees, travel expenses, legal costs, and other associated costs. The provision emphasises the requirement for these costs to be fair, and once again, the principle of costs follow the event applies in the absence of any alternative agreement between the parties.

Furthermore, in accordance with the provisions of domestic law, parties may seek damages to compensate for actual losses incurred and lost profits resulting from the dispute.

In the most recent version of the draft law, the arbitral award is subject to appeal by any party involved in the proceedings. This appeal is initiated through the submission of a request for the resolution of the award to the Court of Appeal in Tirana. The party appealing the award is required to substantiate their appeal by demonstrating one or more of the following:

• that any of the parties to the agreement lacked the legal capacity to act;
• that the arbitration agreement is deemed invalid according to the applicable law;
• that there was a failure to notify the appointment of an arbitrator, the initiation of the arbitration procedure, or the submission of claims or defence;
• that the subject matter in dispute is not covered by the arbitration agreement;
• that the subject matter is beyond the jurisdiction of arbitration, or the arbitration tribunal failed to separate matters within its jurisdiction from those outside of its jurisdiction; or
• that the composition of the arbitration tribunal or the arbitration procedure deviated from the agreement of the parties, unless such agreement was invalid.

Additionally, the Court of Appeal has the authority to independently examine and resolve the appeal when the subject matter falls outside the scope of arbitration as provided by law or when the decision contradicts the rules of the Albanian legal system.

The appeal must be submitted to the court within the timeframe specified by the draft law.

In accordance with domestic law, the parties are prohibited from entering into an agreement that would exclude, expand, or in any way restrict the right of appeal. Certain rules are applicable only in cases where the interested party voluntarily waives their right to appeal.

The most recent version of the draft law stipulates that the parties are similarly prohibited from agreeing to modify or eliminate the right of appeal. This means that they cannot extend the scope of the appeal or exclude it altogether.

The standard outlined in the domestic law for the review of any decision is based on de novo review. This means that the reviewing authority is granted full discretion and is empowered to re-examine the case anew, considering all relevant evidence and legal arguments, without being constrained by the findings or conclusions of the previous decision-maker.

The standard outlined in the domestic law for the review of any decision is based on de novo review. This means that the reviewing authority is granted full discretion and is empowered to re-examine the case anew, considering all relevant evidence and legal arguments, without being constrained by the findings or conclusions of the previous decision-maker.

The enforcement of an award is contingent upon its finality. Therefore, if an appeal court decision or a court decision that has not been appealed within the specified terms in the domestic rules of proceedings is issued, it is automatically deemed final. The enforcement of a court decision is obligatory, and if voluntary compliance proves unattainable, the interested party may seek the intervention of a Bailiff Officer.

Regarding the enforcement of an award issued by an Albanian arbitration, the process involves a recognition procedure before the court of first instance, as provided in the latest version of the draft law. In such cases, the court issues an executive order, and the enforcement of the award is conducted in accordance with domestic legislation. Conversely, the recognition of an international arbitration award is pursued before the Court of Appeal, and upon enforcement, domestic legislation is applicable.

Furthermore, interim decisions are considered as executive titles and are automatically enforceable. In cases where voluntary execution is refused, enforcement can be sought through a bailiff.

The current draft law does not contain provisions addressing these specific cases. The provisions of the recent draft law solely specify the right of appeal when the arbitral tribunal has rendered an interim or final decision on its jurisdiction to recognise its own authority. Conversely, the domestic law provides for the right of appeal to the Supreme Court when a court of first instance has decided to set aside a proceeding.

According to the Civil Procedure Code, the proceeding is suspended pending the final decision on setting aside an award. During the phase of recognition and enforcement, consideration may be given to whether the case involves matters of public order or conformity with the principles of the Albanian legal system. Typically, it is the court itself that evaluates whether a foreign decision is contrary to public order or the principles of the Albanian legal system.

In the event of recognising a foreign award, the Court of Appeal is tasked with evaluating whether any of the conditions outlined in the domestic law for setting aside an award are applicable. These conditions encompass the following:

• the subject matter falls within the jurisdiction of a foreign court rather than arbitration;
• the claim or other notifications from the arbitral tribunal were not duly served to the other party in accordance with the procedural rules;
• another decision has been rendered by a foreign court, involving the same parties, object, and grounds;
• the Albanian court is currently examining a lawsuit that was initiated prior to the arbitration proceedings;
• the recognition and enforcement of the award would contravene the provisions of the applicable legislation; or
• the award is inconsistent with the fundamental principles of the Albanian legal system.

Neither the most recent draft law nor other domestic legislation currently provides for the possibility of class action or group arbitration.

Upon the anticipated approval of the law on international arbitration, it is expected that accompanying regulations governing the proceedings and professional conduct, including rules of procedure and ethics, will also be approved.

The current legal framework does not contain specific provisions addressing the participation of third-party funders in arbitration proceedings. Nevertheless, the domestic legislation on the assignment of obligations may be applicable in certain circumstances.

The recent draft law does not include provisions concerning the consolidation of separate proceedings in the context of arbitration, even when the court is involved.

However, within the realm of domestic court matters, regulations exist in the Civil Procedure Code that govern the consolidation and separation of proceedings. Consolidation may occur when the claims of the parties involve potential compensation, while separation may be warranted when the proceedings are at risk of becoming unduly protracted.

Interim measures that have an impact on third parties, such as the collection of evidence or decisions pertaining to witnesses, are only granted in cases where the involvement of third parties is crucial for providing evidence in the respective proceedings. This principle applies to both domestic and foreign proceedings, and the aforementioned rules outlined in Section 8 remain applicable.