La falta de motivación del laudo como motivo de anulaciónSentencia del Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Madrid CP 1ª de 4 de mayo de 2021

Resum

This decision is in line with the new doctrine of the Constitutional Court, which has limited the invocation of public policy as an appropriate ground for annulment to challenge the failure to state reasons for the award, considering the requirement to state reasons to be a mere legal requirement not imposed by the due process principle (art. 24 EC). This is not an obstacle to controlling reasining when its requirement is imperatively contained in the rules applicable to the arbitration procedure. In fact, the Superior Couto Justice of Madrid makes a positive assessment of the reasonableness and sufficiency of the reasoning, which is not shared by the judge who signs the dissenting opinion. In this extensive particular vote, the dissenting judge carries out a substantive review of the reasoning and, in particular, of the assessment of the evidence, which is based on a confusion between procedural and substantive issues, since the omission of certain elements of evidence by the arbitral tribunal was justified by the parole evidence rule, as a characteristic of the system of interpretation of contracts under New York law.