Answer ... (a) Procedure, including evidence?
If the parties fail to agree on the rules of procedure, the arbitral tribunal may conduct the arbitral proceedings in such a manner as it considers appropriate, in accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration Act (Article 32(3)).
Likewise, the arbitrators may decide on the admissibility, relevance and probative value of the proposed and presented evidence, unless the parties have agreed otherwise (Article 32(4)).
(b) Interim relief?
Unless otherwise agreed by the parties, the arbitrators may order interim relief at a party’s request. The Arbitration Act is not particularly detailed in this regard and states only that the arbitrators may order interim measures that they consider necessary in respect of the subject matter of the dispute, and may at the same time order the opposing party to provide appropriate security (Article 31).
(c) Parties which do not comply with its orders?
There are no specific powers in this respect, especially not of a coercive nature. Generally, the arbitrators may conduct the proceedings in a way that they deem appropriate and may thus draw any inferences that they consider suitable towards a party that does not comply with their orders. However, when it comes to evidentiary matters, since the arbitrators cannot force the parties to abide by their orders, they are expressly empowered to request assistance in taking evidence from a court (Article 46).
(d) Issuing partial final awards?
The arbitrators are granted the power to issue partial awards (Article 48(2)). A partial award is rendered if only a part of the claim is decided. Although the Arbitration Act does not define the conditions for issuing partial awards, these might be drawn from Serbian civil procedure principles, which provide that a partial judgment might be rendered if several claims are put forward by the claimant and only some of those claims are ready for a final ruling (Article 346 of the Civil Procedure Act).
(e) The remedies it can grant in a final award?
The Arbitration Act does not expressly limit the types of remedies that can be granted by arbitrators in arbitrations seated in Serbia. The available types of relief are primarily related to the law applicable to the merits. This principle is subject only to Serbian public policy restrictions.
The Arbitration Act is silent on the matter of interest. In Serbia, the applicable interest rate is either determined by the parties in the underlying agreement (contractual interest rate) (Articles 399 to 402 of the Contracts and Torts Act) or provided for under the law (statutory interest rate) (Articles 277 to 279 of the Contracts and Torts Act). While these rules are generally a part of substantive law and will apply only if Serbian law applies as such, it should also be noted that Serbian law prohibits excessive interest rates and interest on interest (except in credit transactions involving banks). However, it is still questionable whether the breach of such principles would be deemed a breach of Serbian public policy in terms of a procedure to set aside or recognise and enforce an award.