[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
CORRECTION, CLARIFICATION OR COMPLEMENTATION OF THE ARBITRATION AWARD IN HONDURAS
[/vc_column_text][us_separator][vc_column_text] As their names indicate, these are not resources against the Arbitration Award, but rather they are mechanisms to correct the Award of possible inaccuracies that it contains, but at no time is it intended to get to the bottom of the matter or should not be intended to change the meaning of the arbitral resolution issued. In the Arbitration process, according to the Conciliation and Arbitration Law, in its article 70 establishes:"The award shall be subject to correction, clarification, or supplementation and shall become final once the proceedings have been concluded, where applicable."I extract this first paragraph to provide a necessary explanation of each of the meanings and/or differences between each of the mechanisms and why it was necessary to bring up this same process in jurisdictional matters. First, we have the correction of the award: The interpretation of the correction of an arbitral award may vary depending on the legislation of each country and the specific rules or procedures established for arbitration. However, in general, the correction of an arbitral award refers to the power to make limited modifications to the award in order to correct purely formal or drafting errors that do not alter the substance of the arbitral decision. The correction of an award focuses on correcting material, arithmetic, grammatical, punctuation errors, or any other omissions or ambiguities regarding terms that may exist in the award. These errors can be corrected to ensure that the award correctly reflects the original intention of the arbitral tribunal and avoid misunderstandings or confusion. It is important to emphasize that the correction of the award must not entail a substantial revision or modification of the decision rendered by the arbitral tribunal. It cannot be used as an opportunity to reopen the debate on the arguments or evidence presented during the arbitration or to introduce new evidence. The correction of the award is generally subject to certain requirements and deadlines established by the applicable law or arbitration rules. These requirements may include submitting a written request for correction within a specified period of time following notification of the award and clearly specifying the errors to be corrected. Honduran law provides for a three-day deadline for filing the request after notification of the award, and a seven-day deadline for the tribunal to resolve the request. The same timeframes are established in the regulations of the Conciliation and Arbitration Centers of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Cortés in Article 66 and of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Tegucigalpa in Article 78. In summary, the correction of an arbitral award refers to the power to make limited changes to the award to correct purely formal or drafting errors. The main objective is to ensure that the award correctly reflects the original intention of the arbitral tribunal, without altering the substance of the decision adopted. The second term is clarification: The purpose of clarification is to obtain a more detailed or precise explanation of the decision adopted by the arbitral tribunal. Clarification of the award seeks to resolve doubts or confusing interpretations that may arise regarding the grounds, terms, or scope of the arbitral decision. It allows the parties or the arbitral tribunal to clarify or better explain certain aspects of the award in order to facilitate its understanding and execution. It is important to note that clarification of the award does not imply a substantive review of the decision adopted. It cannot be used as an opportunity to question the merits of the decision or present new arguments or evidence. Its main purpose is to clarify or elucidate specific points of the award for a better understanding by the parties involved. Similar to the previous case of correction, the same timeframes are established in the law and regulations of the aforementioned centers. In conclusion, clarification of an arbitral award refers to the possibility of requesting explanations or clarifications on specific aspects of the award that may be unclear or ambiguous. Its objective is to provide greater clarity and understanding of the decision reached by the arbitral tribunal, without involving a substantive review of the merits of the decision. Finally, we have supplementation: this refers to the power to add or complete missing or unresolved aspects in the original decision of the arbitral tribunal. The purpose of supplementation is to address issues or disputed points that have not been sufficiently addressed or resolved in the initial award. Supplementation of the award seeks to ensure that all relevant issues are adequately addressed and resolved. It allows the arbitral tribunal or the parties to request the inclusion of additional information, additional reasoning, or specific provisions that are necessary for a complete and effective resolution of the dispute. It is important to note that the supplementation of the award should not be used as an opportunity to introduce new arguments, evidence, or claims that were not presented during the arbitration. Its main objective is to address outstanding issues or points insufficiently resolved for a more complete and clear decision. In the case of supplementation, the same deadlines are stipulated as for correction and clarification; however, as we can see, the judicial process extends the deadline for this section, as it may entail greater complexity in dealing with an aspect not covered by the tribunal or may involve a disagreement in positions regarding a certain aspect claimed or refuted by one of the parties. To summarize its meaning, we can understand that the supplementation of an arbitral award refers to the possibility of adding or completing missing or unresolved aspects in the original decision of the arbitral tribunal. Its objective is to ensure a complete and effective resolution of the conflict, addressing all the claims raised in the arbitration claim, in the written response, and in the counterclaim, if applicable, that have not been adequately resolved in the first instance award. For a better understanding, I will compare this same system that the judicial process uses to make these types of amendments, not only in judgments, but also in other resolutions prior to the final judgment. It should be clarified that the principle ofInvariability of Resolutionswhich establishes that:"The courts and tribunals may not change the resolutions they issue after they have been signed, but they may clarify any unclear concepts and rectify any material errors." [1]In Articles 204 and 205, the Civil Procedure Code establishes a slight difference regarding corrections and clarifications with respect to supplementation. In supplementation, for failure to rule on timely claims, there will be a 5-day period, different from corrections and clarifications, which only last 3 days. In supplementation, a copy will be given to the other parties for written arguments within a 5-day period. In court, there is no appeal against the order admitting or denying supplementation. Thank you for reading my article on“Correction, clarification or supplementation of the Arbitration Award”I hope this has been helpful in resolving some of your questions and concerns regarding this topic. As professionals in arbitration and jurisdiction, we want to offer our services to assist you with any needs you may have in these areas. If you need advice or would like to learn more about our skills and experience, please do not hesitate to contact us. You can find me on our website.www.lexincorp.comor send us an email tojcbenitez@lexincorp.comandinfohn@lexincorp.comIt will be a pleasure to work with you and help you achieve your goals. See you soon![1]Article 203 of the Civil Procedure Code. [/vc_column_text][us_separator][vc_column_text] Written by: Lic. Juan Carlos Benitez Contreras [/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]
