text:
In recent years one has witnessed an increasing interest in the shale gas issue with the greatest level of concern at different levels of society, up to the political ones. The present article analyzes data on the shale gas resources, both worldwide and in certain regions. The authors assess the possibilities of shale gas production and prospects of its use to substitute other types of energy. They also present the model of atmosphere and climate change due to emissions from additional unconventional gas production and combustion. It is shown, that to maintain stable climatic system, the production of abundant unconventional gas resources should be accompanied by the equivalent reduction of coal use.
Keywords: unconventional gas resources, world production, atmospheric emissions, climate change.
6) the global average surface air temperature increase starting from the pre-industrial period has come close to one degree Celsius (Jones et al. 2014), that is unprecedented through the late Holocene (last 6,000 years).
1) Are there enough natural resources on the Earth for the rapidly developing world economy?
2) Will the uncontrolled increase of anthropogenic burden on the climate system lead to fatal consequences for civilization?
2) for the first time in the past three decades a slightly negative trend of global air temperature is recorded (Jones et al. 2014).
In the early twenty-first century, probably the most significant event in the world energy industry was the wide use of a new fuel type (shale gas) in the United States (EIA 2013a). In just a few years (2007–2012), the production of this unconventional gas reached 270 billion m3 there, which allowed the country to reduce its huge gas imports, which has quite recently been the largest in the world. Despite the fact that today the extensive recovery of shale gas takes place only in the United States and Canada, many other countries have shown interest in use of this new unconventional fuel type. The peculiarity of shale gas consists in its quite a uniform distribution over the world; thus, many countries currently importing energy resources (e.g., China, Poland, Ukraine, and Turkey) can hope to attain higher energy and in some cases even political independence. A notable feature of recent years is the so-called ‘shale gas euphoria’ which is typical, however, mostly of the governmental authorities, political, and business circles. Unfortunately, the discussions concerning the environmental problems related to shale gas production practically always imply only such regional aspects as allocation of large territories and soil and water pollution. However, shale gas, as well as other unconventional gas sources (first of all, coal-bed methane and tight gas), represents a huge reservoir of carbon which, if released into the atmosphere, can produce significant changes in the global carbon balance and lead to large transformations of the climate system. According to recent estimates (Mohr and Evans 2011), these processes may substantially affect global primary energy mix. In its turn, the changes in the amount and structure of the world energy consumption will have a profound influence on atmosphere and climate on a global scale. In this study we analyze global resource and environmental problems connected with increasing production of unconventional gas.
Shale gas falls under the category of so-called unconventional gas sources (Perlova 2010). According to geological indications, this category encompasses gas deposits which are held by absorption, or dissolved in water, or contained in low-permeable and deep-seated collectors. If the technology for commercial production of gas is not developed, such gas relates to unconventional gases according to technological or otherwise economic criteria if the production cost exceeds the market price. The worldwide resources of gas from unconventional sources are huge and amount to more than 4000 trillion m3, which is at least by an order of magnitude larger than the resources of natural gas. Table 1 shows the distribution of these resources according to the type of gas. One should emphasize that the data presented in Table 1 refer rather to geological resources, while technically recoverable resources may be considerably smaller and will probably change over time as additional information becomes available.
Gas hydrates, that is gas in frozen state in ice, account for the major part of unconventional gas sources. As we see in Table 1, the worldwide resources of methane hydrates are very large although they have been estimated rather approximately and thus may vary within an order of magnitude.
Russia, a country with a considerable part of its territory located in the permafrost zone, has favorable conditions for the availability of essential resources of gas hydrates, which was pointed out by the Soviet specialists already in the 1940s (Solovjev 2003). In the 1960s, the first deposits of gas hydrates were discovered in the northern part of the Soviet Union. The development of the Messoyakh deposit in Siberia, which started in 1969, and where attempts to extract natural gas directly from hydrates were, from the experts' view, a success for the first time (Ibid.), can serve as an example of gas production from hydrates.
According to recent assessments of Gazprom VNIIGAZ experts (Perlova 2010), the hydrate gas reserves available in Russia amount to around 400 trillion m3 and are located in the north of the European part and Siberia. Huge gas hydrate deposits are also available in the continental shelf of the Arctic Ocean seas.
Coal-bed methane comprises an essential part of unconventional sources of gas and predominantly refers to methane adsorbed into the solid matrix of coal.
The distribution of coal methane deposits around the world is presented in Table 2. The previously existed technology for extracting gas from coal beds did not allow gas to be produced in a purposeful manner and to be used for supplying gas for households and industry due to a low yield of gas from these beds. In recent years, the situation has somewhat changed due to the development (and some decrease in the cost) of techniques for horizontal drilling and multistage hydraulic bed fracturing (HBF).
Different kinds of coal contain different amounts of methane. Brown coals have low methane content, whereas anthracites have a large content of methane, the latter have essentially lower permeability. In Russia, coals from the Vorkuta and Kuznetsk coal basins are the most promising ones for producing gas. The main reserves of coal methane in Russia are concentrated in Siberia, where experimental commercial production of coal-bed gas has recently been organized in the Taldom area of the Kuznetsk coal field.
We will not dwell on the gases in low permeable collectors and deep beds, but will consider the shale gas in more detail, a fuel that has recently attracted especially keen attention not only in the economic, but also in the wide political circles of different countries.
Shale gas is a kind of natural gas distributed in collectors located in the shale bed layers. Individual gas reservoirs contain not large amounts of resource, but they are huge in totality, due to which special production technologies emerge.
The estimates of shale gas reserves available in different regions and countries around the world that are given in various information sources may differ considerably, which to a significant extent can be attributed to short-term and political considerations.
The most recent report prepared by the US Energy Information Administration (EIA 2013b) excluded from consideration some Middle East countries, particularly rich in traditional hydrocarbon resources. The reserves of coal methane were also not considered. According to these EIA assessments, the worldwide recoverable resources of gas (both conventional and unconventional) totaled 648 trillion m3 with shale gas accounting for 32 per cent (207 trillion m3) of them (EIA 2013b). Only high-quality formations the most promising in terms of shale gas production were taken into account in assessing the resources. The EIA experts indicate that exploratory drilling will make it possible to obtain more accurate estimates of the reserves taking into account such parameters as yield of gas from the wells and the area where production can be organized.
Thus, shale gas resources suitable for commercial production are estimated around the world (except for some Asian countries) at 207 trillion m3 (or 271 btce, which is twice as low as the conventional gas resources). However, unlike conventional natural gas, shale gas is distributed over the globe more or less uniformly, a circumstance that, of course, makes it quite attractive as a local energy resource. Its resources (in trillion m3) are estimated at 47.7 in North America, 40.5 in South America, 38.5 in Africa, and 39.8 in Asia (mainly in China). The reserves of shale gas in Europe are estimated at 17 trillion m3 (22 btce).
According to assessments of the Russian Ministry for Economic Development, the production of unconventional gas in Europe may amount to 15 billion m3/year (around 20 million tce), a figure that in itself cannot have even the smallest effect on either the gas or the more so total energy balance of the region. In this connection it is appropriate to remind that the annual gas consumption in Europe (excluding Russia) exceeds 540 billion m3, including 180 billion m3 supplied from Russia.
The EIA report (EIA 2013b) indicates that the majority of shale deposits are located in the regions that suffer from shortage of conventional sources, in particular, in China, South America, and Europe. Therefore, shale gas could comprise a considerable share in the national energy balance of only certain countries, for example, in France (the estimated reserves amount to 3.9 trillion m3), Poland (4.2 trillion m3), Ukraine (3.6 trillion m3), and South Africa (11.0 trillion m3). It is emphasized that shale gas in South Africa which is totally deprived of traditional gas resources can be used as raw material for producing liquefied gas.
The amount of gas exported from Russia might be substituted by the shale gas produced in the nearest European neighboring states, for example, in Poland and Ukraine. But to what extent is such a prospect real?
Recently, Polish specialists have essentially lowered the data on estimated recoverable resources of shale gas in the country's interior, according to the information contained in the report of the Polish Institute of Geology published in March 2012. The recoverable resources of shale gas in Poland are now estimated at 365–768 billion m3, which is significantly smaller than the EIA assessments. In view of the fact that the consumption of gas in Poland amounts to 16.6 billion m3/year and import – 11 billion m3/year (EIA 2013a), the country can (theoretically) substitute the whole amount of imported gas by domestic production for decades. At the same time, coal accounts for a considerable share of fuel used in the energy industry of Poland, which in the future should be replaced, at least partially, by more environmentally friendly natural gas. Therefore, even with an expected growth of domestic production of shale gas, Poland will probably continue to import natural gas. Thus, the production of own shale gas will hardly give more than a somewhat diversified range of sources for importing natural gas and probably decreased import from Russia.
Nonetheless, the interest in Polish gas is quite significant. By 2012, Poland had granted more than a hundred concessions for carrying out exploration works. However, approximately 60 test wells drilled in Polish shale basins did not bring encouraging results, due to which the inspiration concerning the prospects of Polish shale gas has calmed down to a considerable extent. Moreover, three out of six major US/Canadian companies involved (Exxon Mobil, Talisman and Marathon) have pulled out of Polish gas exploration. The shares of a few independent companies specializing in European shale gas have dropped during the past two years by 70 per cent. On the other hand, sixty wells is a negligibly small number for drawing up important conclusions, while at least one hundred is needed to accurately assess the potential of the country's reserves. For comparison, 13,700 boreholes have been drilled in the single largest American shale basin of Barnett. Nevertheless, in 2014 Poland plans to become the first country in Europe to start commercial, although very limited shale gas production in the western Baltic basin.
The Ukrainian State Geological Service has recently increased its assessment of shale gas resources to 12.5 trillion m3, whereas the U.S. Geological Service has reported about only 3.6 trillion m3. At present, Ukraine imports from Russia around 25 billion m3 of natural gas a year (BP 2014), which is nearly three times larger than the amount of import in Poland, but puts forward the objective to increase the shale gas production up to 13 billion m3 within the next decade. But we will see if Ukraine has enough courage to produce such amount of this commodity, which is still very expensive, technologically and environmentally unfriendly, to be able to completely get rid of the Russian gas import. Nonetheless, one should clearly understand that for Ukraine, as well as for Poland, production of own shale gas is one of the most important components in their struggle for national sovereignty, and there is no doubt that both countries will take every effort to fully implement their ambitious targets in this field.
In Russia, the Baltic, Baikal, Volga and Pechora, Transbaikal, and Olenek platforms are the main shale gas formations, and according to assessments carried out by Gazprom VNIIGAZ (Perlova 2010), the total geological resources of shale gas may amount to 6–8 trillion m3, which is fully consistent with the EIA recent estimate equal to 8.1 trillion m3 (EIA 2013b). Some authors give even more optimistic assessments (up to 20 trillion m3), which is only slightly smaller than the estimates made by the same authors for Europe and China (Ibid.). However, one should bear in mind that at present, the environmental safety and production costs rather than the resource availability are the key aspects determining possible development of this new natural resource. In this connection one should have a closer attention to the experience of the United States, who is an acknowledged pioneer in the field of shale technologies.
At present, the United States occupies the leading position not only in proven recoverable reserves but also in production of shale gas. In 2012, the production of gas in the United States totaled 681 billion m3 (Mohr and Evans 2011) with unconventional sources (coal-bed methane and shale gas) share of more than 45 per cent. The shale gas share is constantly growing which has already resulted in a significant redistribution of the world gas market between the players and a formation of surplus supply by early 2010. As a result of growing production of shale gas, the previously constructed terminals for importing liquefied gas, which remained out of service, are being refurbished for export. In our opinion, this export may soon become quite large, up to 40–50 billion m3 already before 2020, and over 160 billion m3 by 2040. No doubt, in the nearest three or four years, the United States will become a net exporter of natural gas and the world runner-up to Qatar in the liquefied natural gas export.
The current situation with production of shale gas is entirely different on the other side of the Atlantic. Although some EU countries announced their intent to produce gas from shale, the environment specialists shortly thereafter subjected these intentions to serious criticism. These specialists are of strong belief that HBF operations, which are an integral part of shale gas production technology, inflict irreparable damage to the environment. As a result, France has already rejected plans of shale gas production and placed focus on its nuclear power industry; exploration works have been suspended in Germany, Hungary, Romania, and the Czech Republic, and eventually in Bulgaria and Lithuania the HBF operations have been recently prohibited by law. Currently Poland, where it is predominantly politicians who make statements about such method of production, Ukraine, where this matter also has a serious political context, and the United Kingdom with a strong support from its government still remain among a few states in Europe intending to continue attempts to produce gas from shale.
Outside Europe and North America it is China, Argentina, Australia, and India who have the best perspectives to develop commercial unconventional gas production. China has the largest in the world shale gas resources (31 trillion m3 or over 15 per cent of the world total) and has already become the third, after the USA and Canada, country to commence its commercial production. China is planning to produce over 60 m3 of shale gas by 2020 and 90 billion m3 by 2030.The total unconventional gas production in China will reach 230 billion m3 by 2030 divided between coal-bed (115 billion m3), shale (85 billion m3), and tight gas (30 billion m3) (EIA 2013b).
In Russia even experimental production of shale gas is not carried out, which is by no means surprising in view of huge recoverable reserves of conventional natural gas with the cost of production currently 5–6 times lower than for shale gas. However, Russia is planning to produce some 50 billion m3 of unconventional gas by 2030 from coal- bed and tight formations deposits.
For the further analysis, it is worthwhile to point out the specific features relating to the shale gas production technology. Already in the early nineteenth century it was known that shale rock did contain gas. However, this rock features high density and low permeability, and gas accumulates in small isolated ‘pockets’. The first commercial gas well in shale rock was drilled in the United States as far back as 1821 near Fredonia town in the New York State by William Hart, who is regarded in the United States as the ‘father of natural gas’. George P. Mitchell and Tom L. Word are the initiators of large-scale production of shale gas in the United States.
But it is only at the time of energy crisis in the 1970s that the US government assigned financial support for the development of shale deposits in search for new sources of fuel. The exploration works were carried out, during which four giant shale formations were discovered: Barnett, Haynesville, Fayetteville, and Marcellus, stretching for several tens of thousands of square kilometers and, supposedly, containing huge gas deposits. However, at that time these reserves were inaccessible, and the works on developing the relevant production technologies were suspended after petroleum prices had subsequently dropped in the 1980s.
Commercial production of shale gas became possible only after new technologies had emerged. The modern shale gas production technology implies drilling of one vertical well and a few horizontal boreholes with a length of up to two or three kilometers (Dmitrievskiy and Vysotskiy 2010). A mixture of water, sand, and chemical agents is then forced under pressure into the wells. After that, the gas collector walls are destructed under the effect of hydraulic fracturing, and the accessible gas is pumped back up to the surface. Horizontal drilling is carried out by means of innovating seismic modeling techniques 3D GEO, which involves a combined use of geological investigations and mapping with computer-aided data processing, including visualization. As in other gas deposits, gas migrates in natural manner from a high-pressure region to a low-pressure one; therefore, central to the gas production technology is setting up regions with variable pressure (Ibid.).
The theoretical background of the bed hydraulic fracturing technology was developed jointly by the members of the Academy of Sciences Sergey A. Khristianovich and Yuri P. Zheltov at the Petroleum Institute of the USSR Academy of Sciences back in 1953.
– the production of shale gas is profitable only under the conditions of stable demand and high gas prices.
The chemical mixture used by the Halliburton Co. comprises around 1.53 per cent of the total volume of solution and includes hydrochloric acid, formaldehyde, acetic anhydride, propargyl and methyl alcohols, and ammonium chloride. The Chesapeake Energy Co. uses its own composition of chemical mixture, but its amount in the hydraulic solution is much smaller and equal to 0.5 per cent. On the whole, gas producing companies use around 85 different toxic substances for producing shale gas.
There are also other environmental problems connected with shale gas production, primarily those concerned with utilizing the spent liquid after HBF. Apart from water and sand, this liquid contains various chemical additives for achieving more efficient HBF, which entails the danger of groundwater contamination. An increased probability of micro earthquakes in the places where HBF was carried out, as well as in places where the used liquid is pumped into underground cavities, for example, for utilizing it, has been confirmed scientifically. The possibility of gas leakage into the atmosphere during the well construction and operation stages relates to more long-term and least studied problems. According to the assessments presented in Howarth et al. 2011, the leaks into the atmosphere expected during shale gas production may comprise 4–8 per cent of the total gas yield, which is about twice as much as by production of conventional gas.
The use of shale gas instead of coal makes it possible to achieve significantly smaller amount of hazardous emissions from thermal power stations into the atmosphere. Thus, it can be assumed that the use of shale gas may entail reduction of NOx emissions by a factor of two and complete elimination of SO2 emissions. However, in calculating the environmental gains it is important to take into account the amount of emissions over the entire chain of production process, and the environmental gain estimated with such an approach turns to be significantly smaller, because the leaks of methane, a gas producing an extremely strong greenhouse effect, which occur during its production and transportation, significantly amplify the total greenhouse effect. With the percentage of leaks corresponding to the upper range of existing estimates (around eight per cent of the gas yield), a power station burning shale gas becomes similar in total emissions to conventional pulverized coal-fired power stations.
There are extremely contradictory assessments for economic indicators of the shale gas production. The Chesapeake Energy Co. is the forerunner in shale gas production in the United States, which regularly presents the main indicators of its financial activities in free access. According to the analysis of Chesapeake Energy performance indicators, the actual net cost of shale gas production in 2008 was equal to $192.6 per 1000 m3. However, some experts argue that the real costs for producing shale gas are even higher and amount to $212–283 per 1000 m3. Some specialists believe that the companies producing shale gas artificially report lower costs, than real net cost of shale gas.
But now we can state that as of early August 2012, the cost of shale gas production in the US deposits ranged between $130 and 260 per 1000 m3 and that in Canada, $140–230/1000 m3. At the same time, the consumer prices for gas in that region are at a level of around $100/1000 m3 (EIA 2013a), which nonetheless is a factor of 2.5 lower than it was before the beginning of the ‘shale revolution’ in 2008.
But there is also another point of view. The point is that shale gas may be ‘dry’ (without admixtures) and ‘wet’ (with gas condensate containing ethane or butane). This condensate is widely used in the production of plastics, and the prices for it are higher than for gas itself, and it is exactly due to gas condensate that the producing companies get additional gain in the price. Thus, selling byproduct components makes the shale gas production profitable even with low domestic prices. As regards dry gas, its production under the currently existing conditions is still unprofitable.
Nonetheless, the US Government is quite satisfied with the currently existing gas prices, because it is exactly what is badly needed for the US economy for stimulating its growth. This is why the Government actively supports the shale projects. The low interest rate for loans is a factor stimulating investments in gas wells, despite low prices for consumers. In addition, the US power companies stake serious hopes on export of gas products and production technologies as a means for achieving better profitability. In addition, the current unprecedentedly low level of domestic prices will hardly remain and will likely start growing at a stable annual rate of 3.5 per cent already this year (EIA 2013a).
Unfortunately, discussions about the environmental problems related to shale gas production almost always imply only such regional aspects as disruption to rural communities, earthquakes and ground water pollution. However, shale gas, as well as other unconventional gas sources (coal-bed methane and tight gas), contains great amounts of carbon, which can significantly change the global carbon balance and lead to substantial changes in the climate system, if released into the atmosphere. Here we evaluate the greenhouse footprint of unconventional gas production and consumption.
* Source: EIA 2013b; OECD/IEA 2012.
The predicted values of unconventional gas production are based on the estimates of unconventional gas resources given in Table 3, where the results of our earlier calculations (Klimenko and Tereshin 2010b) are presented for comparison purposes (note that calculations in Klimenko and Tereshin 2010b take into account only conventional gas resources). It is obvious that an introduction of unconventional gas sources would sharply increase the role played by natural gas in the world economy, and the peak of annual recovery would grow from 6 to roughly 11 billion tce and shift into the second half of the twenty-first century (Fig. 1). Even at the end of the current century, total gas production is expected to exceed contemporary values, while a complete depletion of these resources is expected only at the end of the twenty-second century. Natural gas will likely become the main component of the world energy balance as early as at the beginning of the 2030s. One can assume that by this time a mass production of unconventional gas will be developed in several countries outside North America and first of all in China, India, Australia, and Argentina.
Nevertheless, from the viewpoint of possible changes in the atmospheric composition and climate, carbon dioxide emissions from combustion of both natural gas and all other fossil fuels are essential, because they depend on the total energy consumption and the world fuel mix. The results presented here are based on the genetic forecast of energy consumption (see the detailed description of the procedure in Klimenko and Tereshin 2010a, 2010b, 2013), which has proved its reliability in long-term forecasting. This method implies stabilization of the world energy consumption at the level of around 30 billion tce by the end of the current century, with the dominating role played by non-fossil sources (mostly unconventional and renewable sources (URS) – solar, wind, hydro, and bioenergy sources). Experience has shown that the long-term forecast of the energy mix represents a much more complicated problem; therefore, we will further consider two extreme scenarios and an intermediate one, namely: the whole volume of unconventional gas consumption is used to substitute either coal (Scenario 1), or URS (Scenario 2), or coal and URS in equal portions (Scenario 3).
The results of simulations presented in Fig. 2 show that the implementation of Scenario 3 would yield a path of future carbon emissions almost the same as that produced by the so-called ‘historical’ scenario whose consequences have been comprehensively discussed in our recent publications (Klimenko and Tereshin 2010a, 2010b, 2013; Khrustalev et al. 2008; Arzhanov et al. 2012) and can be characterized as causing a certain concern with the scale of upcoming climate changes. The substitution of coal with unconventional gas would lead to rapidly reaching (already in two decades) the peak of carbon emission at slightly above 9 Gt of carbon per year, while the replacement of URS causes growth of this peak almost to 12 Gt of carbon per year and shifts it to the second half of the present century.
Under different scenarios of unconventional gas resources development, the changes in the global carbon cycle are significant and they are clearly seen from the variations in carbon dioxide content in the atmosphere (Fig. 3) and the temperature response of the climate system (Fig. 4). Simulation of the global variations in atmospheric CO2 content have been conducted by Dr. Olga V. Mikushina using the box-diffusion model of the carbon cycle; that of the surface air temperature, using the regression-analytical model of climate developed at the Moscow Power Engineering Institute (Klimenko et al. 1997).
As was mentioned above, the shale gas production is associated with significant methane leakage rate into the atmosphere, up to 4–8 per cent of total gas production, and this value is considerably higher than in the case of conventional natural gas production. With respect to this, some researchers claim serious concerns that the release of these amounts of methane, whose greenhouse effect is 25 times stronger than that of carbon dioxide, can intensify global warming. Based on our simulations, under the assumption that technological leakages amount to six per cent of total gas production, we argue that the maximal methane release into the atmosphere from shale gas production will be reached between 2050–2120 and will account for 100–200 million tons per year, or 10–15 per cent of the estimated total emission from all its sources. This will lead to a certain increase in the methane atmospheric content and corresponding higher radiative forcing of this gas during this period by about ten per cent as compared to the basic scenario (Klimenko and Tereshin 2010a).
However, due to the anticipated decline of unconventional gas production with the respective reduction of methane emission and owing to the comparatively short lifetime of this gas in the atmosphere (12 years), the methane concentration will eventually approach the value of the basic scenario during the twenty-second century. Finally, we estimate the contribution of the additional methane due to shale gas production to the anticipated temperature response a few hundredths of a degree Celsius. Partial substitution of coal by unconventional gas in the world energy balance will lead to a noticeable decrease in the anthropogenic impact on the climate system, shifting it down from the critical limits of 500 ppm of CO2 concentration and 2°C of temperature rise as compared to the pre-industrial epoch. However, a slow-down of URS growth rate and preservation of the current orientation to fossil fuels are very dangerous because both the carbon dioxide concentration and then the air temperature will exceed these critical limits well before the end of the current century and remain beyond them for at least two or three centuries. Under these conditions, a significant increase in the acidity of the oceanic upper layer is inevitable, and this will cause massive extinction of many marine species, first of all, corals (Knowlton 2001; Hoegh-Guldberg et al. 2007). This would mean an economic collapse of many developing countries where tourism and offshore fishery are the basic sources of income. For example, in Asia coral reefs alone provide about one-quarter of the annual total fish catch and food for about a billion people. In the Caribbean basin tourism is a major foreign currency earner and in some countries it accounts for up to a half of the gross domestic product. The long-term temperature departure above 2°C (or just 1.2°C above the current value) would almost inevitably cause a partial melting of the Greenland Ice Sheet and of all non-Antarctic glaciers with the following increase in the global sea level by at least two meters (Oppenheimer and Alley 2005; Jevrejeva et al. 2011) and local sea level rise up to three meters (Meyssignac and Cazenave 2012) and a significant weakening of the meridional overturning oceanic circulation in the North Atlantic as well. The latter will likely result in significant changes in the global distribution of surface winds, rainfall and soil moisture and could lead to a global reduction of the terrestrial vegetation net primary production by several per cent (Vellinga and Wood 2002).
1. There is still a substantial uncertainty concerning economical and environmental aspects of mass shale gas production which leaves room for doubts and hampers its further development. Provided present resources assessments are correct, unconventional gas and, first of all, shale gas may solve some regional energy (import substitution) and environmental (coal substitution) problems. However, unconventional gas cannot be regarded as an ‘additional’ energy source, capable to meet the growing energy demand.
2. The large-scale production of shale gas outside North America will hardly be possible in the nearest future. The pattern in which the shale gas reserves are distributed over the globe allows us to assume that it can replace to a significant extent the natural gas supplied from Russia in some European countries (Poland and Ukraine), but this is unlikely to take place until the end of the current decade. However, unconventional gas becomes increasingly important and will make up more than 50 per cent of global gas production in the second half of the current century.
3. The net cost of shale gas production is currently several times higher than that of conventional natural gas in major gas producing countries. To develop a shale gas deposit one should spend from $3 to $4 million per each well. Due to the specific features of shale gas production technology, the costs for maintaining shale gas wells in serviceable state are significantly higher than in traditional deposits.
4. The production of shale gas entails considerable emissions of methane into the atmosphere. Fortunately, this is not a dangerous factor aggravating the greenhouse effect even if the amount of leaks is close to their upper limit estimated at eight per cent of the yield. The expansion of shale gas production does not come in serious contradiction with the growing climate protection requirements. In addition, a substitution of coal by shale gas will result in twofold reduction of NOx emissions and complete elimination of SO2 emissions.
5. The shale gas problem has many aspects, of which the political aspect is undoubtedly the dominating one. As a new source of energy, shale gas is noticeably inferior to traditional natural gas not only in its consumer properties (price, environmental, and technological attractiveness), but also in the availability of resources and will not be able to seriously compete with natural gas at the global level in the nearest two to three decades. In the short term, the shale gas can become an attractive resource only at regional and local levels and only under the conditions of strong protective measures.
6. To maintain stability of the climate system, the production of abundant unconventional gas resources should be accompanied by the equivalent reduction of coal use. In this case one can view shale and other unconventional gas sources as an energy bridge over the current century yet reducing greenhouse gases emissions compared to oil and coal.
The study was supported by Ministry of Science and Education of Russia (basic and project parts), Russian National Foundation (grant No. 14-19-00765) and Russian Foundation for Basic Research (grants No. 12-08-00367, and 13-08-00872).
The authors are thankful to Dr. O. V. Mikushina for model simulations and A. O. Morozova for collecting data.
Arzhanov, M. M., Eliseev, A. V., and Klimenko V. V. et al. 2012. Estimating Climate Changes in the Northern Hemisphere in the 21st Century under Alternative Scenarios of Anthropogenic Forcing. Izvestiya, Atmospheric and Oceanic Physics 48(6): 573–584.
BP. 2014. Statistical Review of World Energy 2014. URL: http://www.bp.com/content/dam/ bp/pdf/Energy-economics/statistical-review-2014/BP-statistical-review-of-world-energy-2014-full-report.pdf.
Dmitrievskiy, A. N., and Vysotskiy, V. I. 2010. Shale Gas: A New Vector in the Development of the Worldwide Market of Hydrocarbon Raw Materials. Gas Industry 8: 44–47. In Russian (Дмитриевский, А. Н., Высотский, В. И. Сланцевый газ: Новый вектор развития мирового рынка углеводородного сырья. Газовая промышленность 8: 44–47).
EIA – Energy Information Administration. 2013a. Annual Energy Outlook 2014 with Projections to 2040. US EIA.
EIA – Energy Information Administration. 2013b. Technically Recoverable Shale Oil and Shale Gas Resources: An Assessment of 137 Shale Formations in 41 Countries outside the United States. US EIA.
Fedorov, A. V., Brierley, C. M., Lawrence, K. T. et al. 2013. Patterns and Mechanisms of Early Pliocene Warmth. Nature 496(7443): 43–49.
Howarth, R. W., Santoro, R., and Ingraffea, A. 2011. Methane and Greenhouse Gas Footprint of Natural Gas from Shale Formations. Climatic Change Letters 106(4): 679–690. DOI 10.1007/s10584-011-0061-5.
Jevrejeva, S., Moore, J. C., and Grinsted, A. 2011. Sea Level Projections to AD 2500 with a New Generation of Climate Change Scenarios. Global and Planetary Change 80–81(1): 14–20.
Jones, P., Harpham, C., Osborn, T. et al. 2014. Combined Land and Marine Temperature Anomalies Datasets. Climatic Research Unit. Norwich: University of East Anglia. URL: http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/.
Khrustalev, L. N., Klimenko, V. V., Emelyanova, L. V. et al. 2008. Dynamics of Permafrost Temperature in Southern Regions of Cryolithozone under Different Scenarios of Climate Change. Earth's Cryosphere 12(1): 3–11. In Russian (Хрусталев, Л. Н., Клименко, В. В., Емельянова, Л. В. и др. Динамика температурного поля многолетнемерзлых пород южных районов криолитозоны при различных сценариях климатических изменений. Криосфера Земли 12(1): 3–11).
Klimenko, V. V., and Tereshin, A. G. 2010a. World Power Engineering and Global Climate after the Year 2100. Thermal Engineering 57(12): 1035–1041.
Klimenko, V. V., and Tereshin, A. G. 2010b.World Energy and Climate in the Twenty-First Century in the Context of Historical Trends: Clear Constraints to the Future Growth. Journal of Globalization Studies 1(2): 27–40.
Klimenko, V. V., and Tereshin, A. G. 2013. Unconventional Gas and Transformation of the Global Carbon Balance. Doklady Earth Sciences 453(1): 1113–1116.
Klimenko, V. V., Klimenko, A. V., Andreichenko, T. N. et al. 1997. Energy, Nature, and Climate. Moscow: MEI Publishing. In Russian (Клименко, В. В., Клименко А. В., Андрейченко, Т. Н. и др. Энергия, природа, климат. Москва: Издательство МЭИ).
Knowlton, N. 2001. The Future of Coral Reefs. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 98(10): 5419–5425.
Meyssignac, B., and Cazenave, A. 2012. Sea Level: A Review of Present-Day and Recent-Past Changes and Variability. Journal of Geodynamics 58: 96–109.
Mohr, S. H., and Evans, G. M. 2011. Long Term Forecasting of Natural Gas Production. Energy Policy 39(9): 5550–5560.
OECD/IEA 2012. Golden Rules for a Golden Age of Gas. World Energy Outlook. Special Report on Unconventional Gas. Paris: OECD/IEA, International Energy Agency.
Oppenheimer, M., and Alley, R. B. 2005. Ice Sheets, Global Warming, and Article 2 of the UNFCC. Climatic Change 68(3): 257–267.
Pagani, M., Liu, Z., LaRiviere, J., and Ravelo, A. C. 2010. High Earth-System Climate Sensitivity Determined from Pliocene Carbon Dioxide Concentration. Nature Geoscience 3(1): 27–30.
Perlova, E. V. 2010. Commercially Significant Nontraditional Sources of Gas: Worldwide Experience with their Development and Prospects for Russia. Territoria Neftegaz 11: 46–51. In Russian (Перлова, Е. В. Коммерчески значимые нетрадиционные источники газа: Мировой опыт освоения и перспективы для России. Территория Нефтегаз 11: 46–51).
Solovjev, V. A. 2003. Natural Gas Hydrates as Potential Mineral Resource. Russian Chemical Journal 48(3): 59–69. In Russian (Соловьев, В. А. Природные газовые гидраты как потенциальное полезное ископаемое. Российский химический журнал 48(3): 59–69).
Tans, P., and Keeling, R. 2014. Global Greenhouse Gas Reference Network. Trends in Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide. NOAA/ESRL. URL: http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ ccgg/trends/.
Vellinga, M., and Wood, R. A. 2002. Global Climatic Impacts of a Collapse of the Atlantic Thermohaline Circulation. Climatic Change 54(3): 251–267.

matches: V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V.


text:
Messrs. Alan W. Boyd and James W. Noel, both of Indianapolis, Ind., for petitioner.
This case is here on writ of certiorari, 292 U.S. 620, 54 S.Ct. 780, 78 L.Ed. 1477, to review a judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, upholding an Indiana statute challenged as unconstitutional. Section 9139, Burns' Ann. St. 1926. Indiana Acts, 1865, Sp. Sess., c. 15, § 6, section 39-1713, Burns' Ann. St. 1933.
Respondent's predecessor in interest brought suit in the District Court for Southern Indiana to recover upon an indemnity bond executed by petitioner. The petitioner set up by answer and demurrer that it is a corporation organized under the laws of New York, carrying on in Indiana the business of writing casualty insurance contracts and surety bonds; that the claim for which suit was brought was presented to petitioner more than fifteen months before the suit was begun; that the indemnity bond contained a stipulation that no proceedings upon a claim upon the bond should be brought more than fifteen months after the date of the presentation of the claim; and that the Indiana statute, section 9139, declaring such provision invalid, is void because a denial of the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. The District Court gave judgment on the pleadings for respondent which the Court of Appeals affirmed. 68 F.(2d) 481.
The statute, construed by the Supreme Court of Indiana in Caywood v. Supreme Lodge, 171 Ind. 410, 86 N.E. 482, 23 L.R.A.(N.S.) 304, 131 Am.St.Rep. 253, 17 Ann.Cas. 503, as applicable only to insurance corporations organized in states other than Indiana, forbids them to insert in their policies certain specified conditions, not now material, and enacts that 'any provision or condition contrary to the provisions of this section, or any condition in said policy inserted to avoid the provisions of this section, shall be void, and no condition or agreement not to sue for a period of less than three years (3) shall be valid.' There is no similar legislation applicable to domestic insurance companies carrying on the same class of business as petitioner. They are free to insert reasonable stipulations in their policies for a short period of limitation. Cf. Caywood v. Supreme Lodge, supra. The statutory period of limitation for suits to recover money on indemnity policies is ten years. Section 2-602, Burns' Ann. St. 1933; cf. Fidelity & Casualty Co. v. Jasper Furniture Co., 186 Ind. 566, 117 N.E. 258.
We may assume that the petitioner, by entering the state of Indiana and carrying on business there, is not barred from asserting that its legislation conflicts with the Federal Constitution, Power Mfg. Co. v. Saunders, 274 U.S. 490, 497, 47 S.Ct. 678, 71 L.Ed. 1165, and we pass directly to the single question presented, whether the prohibition applied here to a foreign casualty insurance company infringes the Fourteenth Amendment because it is not likewise applied to domestic companies. Petitioner does not assail the prohibition as not within the scope of the legislative power or as itself so arbitrary or unreasonable as to be a denial of due process. It is not argued, nor could it be on the record before us, that the restriction would be unconstitutional if applied equally to both classes of corporations. Discrimination alone is the target of the attack.
The equal protection clause does not prohibit legislative classification and the imposition of statutory restraints on one class which are not imposed on another. But this Court has said that not every legislative discrimination between foreign and domestic corporations is permissible merely because they differ, and that with respect to some subjects of legislation the differences between them may afford no reasonable basis for the imposition of a statutory restriction upon foreign corporations, not applied to domestic corporations. The ultimate test of validity is not whether foreign corporations differ from domestic, but whether the differences between them are pertinent to the subject with respect to which the classification is made. Power Mfg. Co. v. Saunders, supra, 274 U.S. 494, 47 S.Ct. 678, 71 L.Ed. 1165. If those differences have any rational relationship to the legislative command, the discrimination is not forbidden. Washington ex rel. Bond & Goodwin & Tucker, Inc., v. Superior Court, 289 U.S. 361, 366, 53 S.Ct. 624, 77 L.Ed. 1256, 89 A.L.R. 653; National Union Fire Insurance Co. v. Wanberg, 260 U.S. 71, 75, 43 S.Ct. 32, 67 L.Ed. 136. See State of Ohio ex rel. Clarke v. Deckebach, 274 U.S. 392, 396, 47 S.Ct. 630, 71 L.Ed. 1115.
Here the classification relates to the legislative command that insurance companies shall not by agreement limit the period within which suit may be brought on their contracts to less than three years. The record, briefs, and arguments before us are silent as to legislation or other local conditions in Indiana bearing on the question whether there may be differences, in the circumstances attending suits brought against local companies and those brought against foreign companies, such as to justify a difference in the applicable periods of limitation. It is not argued that a reasonable time for bringing a suit against domestic insurance companies of Indiana may not, in some circumstances at least, differ from that for suing foreign corporations. We are not told whether, in 1865 when the challenged statute was enacted, or since, differences in the legislative schemes of the state affecting the two classes of casualty insurance companies, foreign and domestic, or differences in their business practices within the state, have or have not made more difficult and time-consuming the collection of claims and the preparations for litigation against foreign insurance companies than against domestic companies. But we are asked to say a priori that, in the circumstances attending the two classes of suits, there can be no differences pertinent to the legislative command; that there can be no reasonable basis for the legislative judgment that a different period of limitation should be applied to the one than to the other.
It is a salutary principle of judicial decision, long emphasized and followed by this Court, that the burden of establishing the unconstitutionality of a statute rests on him who assails it, and that courts may not declare a legislative discrimination invalid unless, viewed in the light of facts made known or generally assumed, it is of such a character as to preclude the assumption that the classification rests upon some rational basis within the knowledge and experience of the legislators. 1 A statutory discrimination will not be set aside as the denial of equal protection of the laws if any state of facts reasonably may be conceived to justify it. Rast v. Van Deman & Lewis Co., 240 U.S. 342, 357, 36 S.Ct. 370, 60 L.Ed. 679, L.R.A. 1917A, 421, Ann. Cas. 1917B, 455; State Board of Tax Commissioners v. Jackson, 283 U.S. 527, 537, 51 S.Ct. 540, 75 L.Ed. 1248, 73 A.L.R. 1464.
The statutes of Indiana disclose a legislative scheme applicable to domestic casualty insurance companies differing radically from that applied to foreign corporations, and in some respects more exacting. Compare chapter 17 of title 39, Burns' Ann. St. 1933, with other chapters of that title. A pertinent difference which may be noted relates to the maintenance of a fund with a public officer for the protection of policyholders. Domestic companies are required to maintain with the state commissioner of insurance a guaranty fund in cash or approved securities, Burns' Ann. St. 1933, §§ 39-1101, 39-1105, to be augmented by the addition of 5 per cent. of all dividends paid, section 39-118. These provisions appear not to be extended to foreign companies, but they, like foreign corporations writing surety bonds, are permitted to maintain a guaranty fund of a different type with an officer of the state of incorporation. Sections 39-1703, 25-1401, 25-1402, 25-1301, 25-1304, Burns' Ann. St. 1933.
There is no showing that the situation of foreign corporations, writing casualty insurance contracts in Indiana, is so similar to that of domestic corporations as to preclude any rational distinction between them as regards the time required for negotiating settlements of claims and the determination whether suits upon them should be prosecuted within or without the state. Where the record is silent, we cannot presume to declare that there is such similarity, or to say that a state is prohibited from making any distinction in the length of time within which suit must be brought. It is not beyond the range of probability that foreign casualty companies, as distinguished from domestic companies, generally keep their funds and maintain their business offices, and their agencies for the settlement of claims, outside the state. For aught that appears such is the actual situation. See Concordia Fire Insurance Co. v. Illinois, 292 U.S. 535, 548, 54 S.Ct. 830, 78 L.Ed. 1411. We cannot say that these considerations may not have moved the Legislature to insist that a longer time should be given for bringing suit against foreign companies than the latter. It was competent for the Legislature to determine whether such differences exist, and upon the basis of those differences, and in the exercise of a legislative judgment, to make choice of the method of guarding against the evil aimed at. Standard Oil Co. v. City of Marysville, 279 U.S. 582, 584, 49 S.Ct. 430, 73 L.Ed. 856; Hardware Dealers Mut. Fire Insurance Co. v. Glidden Co., 284 U.S. 151, 158, 159, 52 S.Ct. 69, 76 L.Ed. 214. It could likewise decide whether the differences are general enough, as respects foreign companies, to call upon it in the exercise of legislative judgment, not shown to be irrational, to say whether the legislative prohibition should be applied to them as a class rather than to members of it selected by more empirical methods. State of Ohio ex rel. Clarke v. Deckebach, supra, 274 U.S. 397, 47 S.Ct. 630, 71 L.Ed. 1115; Westfall v. United States, 274 U.S. 256, 259, 47 S.Ct. 629, 71 L.Ed. 1036; Silver v. Silver, 280 U.S. 117, 123, 50 S.Ct. 57, 74 L.Ed. 221, 65 A.L.R. 939.
Mr. Justice VAN DEVANTER, Mr. Justice McREYNOLDS, Mr. Justice SUTHERLAND, and Mr. Justice BUTLER dissent, because they are of opinion that the principles stated and applied in Power Manufacturing Company v. Saunders, 274 U.S. 490, 47 S.Ct. 678, 71 L.Ed. 1165; Kentucky Finance Corporation v. Paramount Auto Exchange Corporation, 262 U.S. 544, 43 S.Ct. 636, 67 L.Ed. 1112; Hanover Fire Ins. Co. v. Carr (Hanover Fire Insurance Company v. Harding), 272 U.S. 494, 47 S.Ct. 179, 71 L.Ed. 372, 49 A.L.R. 713; and Guinn v. United States, 238 U.S. 347, 363, 35 S.Ct. 926, 59 L.Ed. 1340, L.R.A.1916A, 1124; require that the Indiana statute in question, as construed and applied in this case, be held void as contravening the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and that the judgment under review be reversed accordingly.
Rehearing denied 55 S.Ct. 647, 79 L.Ed. -.
Erb v. Morasch, 177 U.S. 584, 586, 20 S.Ct. 819, 44 L.Ed. 897; Stebbins v. Riley, 268 U.S. 137, 143, 45 S.Ct. 424, 69 L.Ed. 884, 44 A.L.R. 1454; Middleton v. Texas Power & Light Co., 249 U.S. 152, 158, 39 S.Ct. 227, 63 L.Ed. 527; Swiss Oil Corp. v. Shanks, 273 U.S. 407, 413, 414, 47 S.Ct. 393, 71 L.Ed. 709; Fort Smith Light & Traction Co. v. Board of Improvement of Paving District No. 16, 274 U.S. 387, 391, 392, 47 S.Ct. 595, 71 L.Ed. 1112; State of Ohio ex rel. Clarke v. Deckebach, 274 U.S. 392, 47 S.Ct. 630, 71 L.Ed. 1115; Silver v. Silver, 280 U.S. 117, 123, 50 S.Ct. 57, 74 L.Ed. 221, 65 A.L.R. 939; O'Gorman & Young, Inc., v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co., 282 U.S. 251, 257, 258, 51 S.Ct. 130, 75 L.Ed. 324, 72 A.L.R. 1163; Railway Express Agency v. Com. of Virginia, 282 U.S. 440, 444, 51 S.Ct. 201, 75 L.Ed. 450, 72 A.L.R. 102; State Board of Tax Commissioners v. Jackson, 283 U.S. 527, 537541, 51 S.Ct. 540, 75 L.Ed. 1248, 73 A.L.R. 1464; Hardware Dealers Mut. Fire Insurance Company v. Glidden Co., 284 U.S. 151, 158, 52 S.Ct. 69, 76 L.Ed. 214; Boston & Maine R.R. v. Armburg, 285 U.S. 234, 240, 52 S.Ct. 336, 76 L.Ed. 729; Lawrence v. State Tax Commission, 286 U.S. 276, 283, 52 S.Ct. 556, 76 L.Ed. 1102, 87 A.L.R. 374; Concordia Fire Insurance Co. v. Illinois, 292 U.S. 535, 547, 548, 54 S.Ct. 830, 78 L.Ed. 1411.

matches:
§ 6
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.


The Court of Arbitration at the Centre for Mediation and Arbitration of Transport Sp. z o.o. (ltd) in Warsaw, hereinafter referred to as the “Court”, the “Court of Arbitration” or the “Court of Arbitration at the Centre for Mediation and Arbitration of Transport Sp. z o.o. (ltd) in Warsaw,” is a permanent court of arbitration.
The internal organization and the rules of the Court are set forth in: the By-laws of the Court of Arbitration at the Centre for Mediation and Arbitration of Transport Sp. z o.o. (ltd) in Warsaw hereinafter referred to as the “By-laws” and the Rules of the Court of Arbitration at the Centre for Mediation and Arbitration of Transport Sp. z o.o. (ltd) in Warsaw hereinafter referred to as the “Rules” or the “Rules of the Court”.
The proceeding at the Court consists of two instances.
the parties decided that the disputes which arose between them shall be resolved by ad hoc arbitration administered by the Court of Arbitration.
decision by a common court on referring the parties to mediation.
The parties may submit to the Court for resolution any disputes involving property or non-property rights – which may be subject to an in-court settlement, with the exception of cases involving alimony.
The Jury alone shall resolve issues involving the jurisdiction of the Court and the existence, validity (effectiveness) as well as the scope of the arbitration agreement (arbitration clause); mediation agreements shall be resolved only by the mediator.
Any objection that the Court lacks jurisdiction should be raised before any step is taken on the merits. The Jury may, however, consider such objection afterwards if a delay in filing is justified.
If the objection that the Court lacks jurisdiction is accepted, the lawsuit shall be rejected at a hearing or at a closed meeting.
The place of proceeding shall be in the Court, unless otherwise agreed by the parties.
After hearing the parties, the Jury may determine a different venue as the place of proceeding if this is justified by the subject matter of proceedings, the circumstances of the case or the parties’ convenience.
Any hearings or other actions may be conducted outside of the place of proceeding, in a venue to be indicated in a decision by the Jury.
Unless otherwise agreed by the parties, the parties shall be bound by the Rules being in effect on the date of conclusion of the arbitration clause designating the Court.
The Jury, in applying the provisions of the Rules, shall take into account the provisions of the arbitration agreement (arbitration clause) and the principles and manner of conduct before the Court, as agreed by the parties.
Unless otherwise agreed by the parties, the provisions of these Rules shall apply to ad hoc proceedings.
The Jury is required to treat all parties equally, by acting in an impartial manner.
Each party has the right to make, and the Court is required to hear, any submissions and allegations relevant to the resolution of the case as well as evidence in support thereof or in refutation of any submissions and allegations of the opposing party.
The Jury shall resolve a dispute pursuant to the law applicable to the relationship concerned and – provided that it was authorized to do so by the parties – pursuant to the general rules of law or equity (ex aequo et bono). In each and every case, however, the Jury shall take into account the provisions of the agreement and the established customs which are applicable to the legal relationship concerned.
To all matters not settled herein, the provisions of the Polish Civil Code shall apply mutatis mutandis.
The parties may agree the language – i.e. Polish, English, French, German or Russian – in which the proceeding shall be conducted. Unless otherwise decided by the parties, the above stipulation shall apply to all written submissions and statements of the parties, to the hearing as well as any rulings and notices of the Court.
If the parties fail to agree the language of arbitration, the proceedings shall be conducted in Polish. However, by taking into account the respective positions of the parties and the circumstances of the case, particularly the language of the parties’ agreement, other documents adduced as evidence in the case and the language(s) in which witnesses, experts and the parties were heard, the Jury may decide to use a language other than Polish for specific actions in the proceedings.
The Chairman of the Jury appoints an expert interpreter for the entire proceedings or a part thereof, if the proceedings are conducted in a language other than Polish.
The Jury may decide that every document prepared in a language other than Polish has to be translated into the language of proceedings or demand that the parties to the proceedings append a translation of any documents submitted by them with regard to the case.
If the proceedings are conducted in a language other than Polish, any records of a hearing and written submissions filed by the parties or made by the Jury shall be translated into Polish by a translator approved by the Jury.
The costs of interpretation at a hearing and translation of documents shall be borne by the parties pursuant to the principles laid down by the Jury.
In all matters, the Court and the Jury shall make every effort to ensure that the award issued is effective and enforceable within the meaning of applicable provisions governing the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards.
A party shall conduct actions in the proceedings within a term of 14 days following the receiving of the letter, unless the Jury decides otherwise.
Letters and written notices in the proceedings shall be served upon a party and, if the party appointed a legal representative or an attorney for service of process, they shall be served upon such legal representative or attorney.
Unless otherwise decided by the parties, each letter and written notice in the arbitral proceedings shall be deemed served if it has been delivered to the recipient in person or delivered to his seat, regular place of residence or to the mailing address indicated by him.
If the recipient is an entrepreneur or other entity recorded in the relevant court register or other public register, any letter and written notice shall be deemed served if it reached the address indicated in the register, unless the party concerned indicated a different address for service.
If none of the places mentioned in the preceding paragraphs can be established by acting with due diligence, each letter and written notice shall be deemed served if it was sent to the last-known address of the recipient’s seat or its last-known regular place of residence. In such event, it is deemed that a given document was served on the last day of the period in which the recipient could collect it.
Any proceeding before the Court shall be confidential.
All participants in proceedings before the Court shall abide by the principle of confidentiality, taking into account the extent that the parties agreed the said principle in an agreement or in their mutual declarations, submitted to the Court in writing or appended to the record of the hearing. The parties may agree that the very fact of commencement of proceedings shall be deemed confidential.
The Jury or, before its appointment the President of the Court, can decide, at the motion of the party, to apply measures aimed at preserving the business and trade secrets or any other confidential information relating to the party to the proceeding or third party.
If the principles and manner of conduct before the Court, as agreed by the parties, or if above were not agreed by the parties the provisions of these Rules are contravened, it shall be deemed that a party which was aware of such contravention and failed to raise an objection immediately, however not later than in 7 days, has waived its right to object to such contravention in proceedings before the Court or in the motion to set aside an award of the Court by a common court.
The Centre for Mediation and Arbitration of Transport Sp. z o.o. (ltd) in Warsaw, its governing bodies and employees, the governing bodies of the Court, its arbitrators, mediators and employees shall not be held liable for any damages arising out of any acts or omissions in connection with the arbitration or mediation proceedings, unless such damage was caused intentionally.
An arbitrator and mediator shall be impartial and independent and shall perform their duties according to their best knowledge and skills.
An arbitrator and mediator cannot undertake to perform their duties if the circumstances of a given case give rise to justified doubts as to their impartiality or independence and if they do not possess the qualifications specified in the parties’ agreement.
An arbitrator and/or mediator shall be required to disclose to the arbitrators and the parties any such circumstances as may give rise to doubts as to their independence or impartiality, most notably their direct links to, and professional contacts with, the parties or related entities as well as legal representatives of the parties and their law offices or the companies in which they practice their profession if such links or contacts have occurred during the last three years.
A written statement of non-acceptance of appointment must be transmitted immediately by an arbitrator or mediator to the President of the Court, so that another arbitrator/mediator may be appointed/nominated.
An arbitrator and/or mediator submits a written statement of independence and impartiality before being provided with the case file.
Subject to § 50 Sec. 1 a mediator cannot participate as an arbitrator or a legal representative of a party in arbitral proceedings in a case that was subject to mediation.
The Court maintains a List of Arbitrators Recommended by the Court of Arbitration at the Centre for Arbitration and Mediation of Transport Sp. z o.o. (ltd) in Warsaw, hereinafter referred to as the “List of Arbitrators” and a List of Mediators of the Mediation Centre of the Court of Arbitration at the Centre for Arbitration and Mediation of Transport Sp. z o.o. (ltd) in Warsaw, hereinafter referred to as the “List of Mediators”. The List of Arbitrators is divided into two parts: a List of Arbitrators-Lawyers and a List of Arbitrators-Professionals.
The List of Arbitrators and the List of Mediators may include only natural persons having full capacity for acts in law, impeccable moral character, enjoying full civil rights and possessing qualifications useful to perform the duties of arbitrator or mediator.
The Committee of the Court, acting at the motion of the President of the Court, makes a decision on including arbitrators and mediators in, and striking them from, the List of Arbitrators and the List of Mediators.
The List of Arbitrators and the List of Mediators should include the following: name and surname of the arbitrator or mediator, university degree and professional titles, profession, command of foreign languages, as well as description of other qualifications and skills useful in arbitral or mediation proceedings. Arbitrators and Mediators shall also provide other personal data for internal use of the Court.
The Secretary shall invite each party to appoint an arbitrator from the List of Arbitrators within no more than 2 weeks. At the same time, the Secretary shall send the List of Arbitrators to the parties. If no arbitrator is appointed by the party/parties, the President of the Court shall nominate the arbitrator/arbitrators.
The Secretary shall invite the arbitrators appointed by the parties or nominated by the President of the Court in the party/parties’ stead, to appoint Chairman of the Jury within 2 weeks. If the arbitrators fail to appoint Chairman of the Jury, the President of the Court shall nominate Chairman of the Jury.
If the parties agreed that a specified third party is to appoint an arbitrator or Chairman of the Jury, and the said third party has failed to so appoint within the time limit fixed by the parties or – in the absence of such time limit – within one month after the Secretary has invited the said third party to make the appointment, the arbitrator or Chairman of the Jury shall be nominated by the President of the Court, unless otherwise decided by the parties.
If the President of the Court is appointing the arbitrator/arbitrators and the parties are citizens of different countries, leave in different countries or have a registered seat in different countries, the President of the Court shall take into account the nationality, place of living and other connections between the arbitrators and those countries.
The term „Jury” shall mean three arbitrators appointed/nominated to resolve a dispute pursuant to the provisions of these Rules.
Each Jury shall consist of at least one arbitrator from the List of Arbitrators-Lawyers and one arbitrator from the List of Arbitrators-Professionals.
If both parties nominated arbitrators from the List of Arbitrators-Lawyers, the Chairman of the Jury must be appointed/nominated from the List of Arbitrators-Professionals.
If both parties nominated arbitrators from the List of Arbitrators-Professionals, the Chairman of the Jury must be appointed/nominated from the List of Arbitrators-Lawyers.
If there is more than one person acting as claimant or defendant, such persons jointly appoint one arbitrator within the time limit fixed in § 17 Sec. 1.
If not appointed under the procedure set forth in Sec. 1, the arbitrator shall be appointed by the President of the Court.
Any summonses or other communications from the Court and the parties shall be addressed to all persons acting as claimant or defendant and, where the said persons have appointed their attorneys for service of process, the same shall be addressed to such attorneys.
The Centre for Mediation and Arbitration of Transport Sp. z o.o. (ltd) in Warsaw shall conclude an agreement with an arbitrator (the “Agreement with an Arbitrator”), whereby the latter shall undertake to duly fulfill the duties of arbitrator for a remuneration.
In the event of a refusal or inability to conclude the agreement referred to in Sec.1, the procedure set forth in § 17 shall apply mutatis mutandis, provided, however, that in case of another refusal or inability to conclude the agreement, the arbitrator shall be nominated by the President of the Court.
An arbitrator can be challenged only if there are circumstances giving rise to justified doubts about his independence or impartiality and/or if he lacks the qualifications specified in the parties’ agreement or in these Rules. If the parties fail to determine the mode of operation concerning the challenge of an arbitrator, the provisions of these Rules shall apply.
The party challenging an arbitrator shall file a written request with the President of the Court through the Secretary, citing the circumstances justifying its demand (grounds for challenge).
A party can challenge an arbitrator within two weeks after becoming aware of the grounds for such challenge. Upon lapse of this period, the party shall be deemed to have waived its right to challenge an arbitrator on such grounds.
A party can challenge the arbitrator whom the party itself has appointed, or participated in the appointment thereof, only on the grounds of which it learned after the arbitrator’s appointment.
The Secretary shall provide the other party and the arbitrators with a copy of the challenge of an arbitrator, so that they may express their position on the contents of the motion within the time limit fixed, not exceeding 14 days.
The President of the Court decides on the challenge of an arbitrator in the form of a decision requiring no justification.
Submission of a challenge of an arbitrator shall not affect the conduct of proceedings, unless otherwise decided by the Jury.
An arbitrator shall be replaced in the event of his death, resignation, challenge, removal by the parties or by the President of the Court by way of a decision and in the event of a refusal or inability to conclude the Agreement with an Arbitrator.
An arbitrator may resign at any time by filing a written statement with the President of the Court and giving the reasons for such resignation therein. If such resignation is made for no important reasons, the arbitrator shall be liable for any resulting damage.
The parties may at any time remove any arbitrator by submitting a joint statement in writing to the President of the Court. If there is more than one person acting as claimant or defendant, a joint statement of all such persons is required.
Each party may request that the President of the Court issues a decision on removing an arbitrator who is not fulfilling his duties in due fashion, most notably if it is evident that the arbitrator will not perform his tasks in a timely manner, or if he delays the performance of such tasks without any valid reason. Due to the extraordinary reasons, the President of the Court can issue such a decision ex officio.
The President of the Court shall make a decision on repeating the appointment of the arbitrator having been appointed by the parties, the party or arbitrators.
The President of the Court shall make a decision on repeating a part or the whole of proceedings with the participation of a new arbitrator.
In case of the second resignation or removal by the parties or the President of the Court of an arbitrator having been appointed by one and the same party, the other party may, within one week after the day it has learned of the arbitrator’s resignation or removal, demand that the President of the Court nominates an arbitrator in that party’s stead. The above provision shall also apply in the event of any further resignation or removal of an arbitrator.
Arbitral proceedings are commenced by filing a lawsuit.
If an award of the Court of Arbitration is set aside by a common court, the proceedings in the case are resumed at the request of one of the parties.
If a common court suspends the proceedings to set aside an award of the Court of Arbitration, in order to remove the grounds for setting aside the said award the Jury resumes the proceedings in the case at the request of one of the parties.
Unless otherwise agreed by the Parties, the Jury may, on the motion of a party which has substantiated the claim being asserted, decide to secure a claim in any manner it may find appropriate in view of the subject matter of the dispute. The Jury shall issue a decision along with a justification and may make the execution thereof contingent upon the party concerned posting appropriate security.
The decision referred to in Sec. 1 is enforceable after an exequatur (enforcement clause) is granted by the common court and may be amended or set aside by the Jury on the motion of a party.
The parties may file requests for conservatory measures with a common court and to secure evidence in connection with the arbitration proceeding. Submission of such requests by parties to arbitration proceedings shall not be deemed contrary to the arbitration agreement. The parties are required to inform the Court in writing of any conservatory measure so obtained.
At the request of a party, the Jury may decide to secure evidence if it is necessary due to the circumstances of the case. A decision on securing evidence requires justification.
A party files a lawsuit with the Court in the language of proceedings and, whenever Polish is not the language of proceedings, together with a translation into that language, by attaching the necessary number of copies for each of the defendants and for each arbitrator.
contain a document confirming that the party paid the arbitration fee.
A lawsuit shall also name the arbitrator appointed by the party concerned or a motion for an arbitrator to be nominated by the President of the Court.
If a party appoints a legal representative, the lawsuit should be accompanied by the original or a certified copy of a power of attorney, together with the address of the legal representative.
If the parties do not agree otherwise, the lawsuit can be modified or supplemented during the course of proceedings, unless the Jury deems it impermissible.
Withdrawal of a lawsuit without waiving the claim is effective after the other party has expressed consent or if it had occurred before the hearing was scheduled.
If the claimant withdraws the lawsuit and waives its claim before the appointment/nomination of the Chairman of the Jury, the President of the Court shall discontinue the proceedings.
The Secretary shall call upon the claimant to pay within the fixed time limit not exceeding two weeks an arbitration fee; and if the lawsuit does not meet the requirements set forth in § 25 Sec. 1 and 2, he shall call upon the claimant to cure its deficiencies. The fees are specified in the “Tariff of fees of the Court of Arbitration at the Centre for Mediation and Arbitration of Transport Sp. z o.o. (ltd) in Warsaw,” hereinafter referred to as the “Tariff of fees,” in effect on the day the lawsuit is filed. If the claimant fails to cure deficiencies in the lawsuit or fails to pay in full the arbitration fee within the time limit, the Secretary shall order the lawsuit returned.
If it is evident that the Court of Arbitration lacks jurisdiction, the Secretary shall immediately, without resolving the issues of the existence, validity (effectiveness) and scope of the arbitration agreement (arbitration clause), bring it to the attention of the claimant, calling upon the claimant to express its position in writing within the fixed time limit not exceeding 14 days. If the claimant does not reaffirm the lawsuit, the case shall be regarded as not having been initiated. If the claimant reaffirms its position on the jurisdiction of the Court of Arbitration and the time limit fixed expires to no effect, Sec. 1 shall apply.
In the case of justifiable doubts, the Jury may determine the actual amount in dispute. The provisions of Sec. 1 shall apply mutatis mutandis.
The parties shall submit to the Court the same number of copies of any written submissions during the course of proceedings as in the event of the lawsuit.
During the proceedings the party shall deliver any written submissions directly to another party.
Sec. 2 does not apply if the party is filing the Court with a counter-lawsuit (defined in § 29).
Following commencement of proceedings and payment of the arbitration fee, the Secretary shall serve the respondent with the lawsuit, along with information about the Court’s webside on which these Rules and the List of Arbitrators are listed, and shall invite the respondent to file the statement of defence within 14 days.
The lack of a statement of defence shall not halt the proceedings.
Until closing of the first hearing, the defendant may file a counter-lawsuit if the defendant’s counterclaim is related to the claim of the claimant or if it can be set off and if the Court is competent to hear such counter-lawsuit.
The provisions of these Rules governing a lawsuit shall apply to any counter-lawsuit mutatis mutandis. The Jury appointed to hear the main lawsuit shall examine the counter-lawsuit.
Until the hearing is closed, the defendant may claim a set-off if the defendant’s claim is fit for a set-off against the claimant’s claim.
At the request of the parties, made before the hearing is closed, the Jury may decide on combining, for joint consideration, a claim brought to the Court of Arbitration in a different case between these parties.
A third party may be allowed to participate in pending arbitral proceedings with the consent of the parties, pursuant to a decision by the Jury.
The Secretary shall invite the person named in the decision of the Jury to timely pay an arbitration fee in the amount specified in the “Tariff of fees” being in effect on the day the lawsuit is filed. If the said third party fails to pay the arbitration fee within the time limit fixed, it shall not be allowed to participate in the proceedings.
A third party is not entitled to appoint an arbitrator.
The Jury shall suspend proceedings at the joint request of the parties.
ex officio if there are circumstances preventing the case from being continued.
The Jury may decide to resume the proceedings at the request of a party, or ex officio if the reason for suspension of proceedings has ceased to exist. However, the Jury may resume proceedings suspended due to the reason specified in Sec. 2 let. b according to the circumstances, also prior to the final termination of the proceedings due to which such stay occurred.
neither party files a motion to resume the proceedings before lapse of one year from the date of issuance of a decision on suspension, nor does it object within this time-frame to the discontinuance thereof.
further proceeding has become useless or impossible to continue.
The Jury shall examine the case at a hearing, unless the parties agree that the proceedings will be conducted without any hearing being scheduled or if the parties exhaustively present all such circumstances as they deem relevant to the defense of their rights, and the Jury finds the case to be sufficiently clarified to be resolved without any hearing being scheduled. The Jury shall consider the case at a hearing if so requested by one of the parties which did not agree that the proceedings would be conducted without a hearing being scheduled.
The hearing shall be non-public. In addition to the parties and their legal representatives, the hearing can be attended only by the persons summoned and, with the consent of the parties and the Jury, by other persons as well – no more than two persons to be indicated by each party. The hearing may be attended by the President of the Court, his deputies, the Secretary and the recording clerk.
The Chairman of the Jury shall fix the date of the hearing, however taking into account the motions of the parties, who want to attend the hearing in person. The Chairman of the Jury shall issue orders necessary to prepare the hearing, so that the case, insofar as possible, may be resolved after the first hearing. The Secretary shall notify the parties of the date and place of the hearing.
The Chairman of the Jury shall preside over the hearing.
The absence at a hearing of a party or its legal representative, duly notified thereof, does not halt the proceedings.
The Jury shall exercise its own judgment to make decisions about evidentiary motions of the parties. In particular, the Jury may take evidence from documents, by inspection, through hearing witnesses and the parties, from experts’ opinions as well as any other evidence it may deem necessary for the matter to be clarified. The Jury may also take from the parties and witnesses sworn statements, as well as demand that the parties deliver the relevant information to an expert and submit or provide any documents or other objects for examination.
Unless otherwise agreed by the parties, after submitting his opinion in writing, an expert shall, at the request of a party or if the Jury deems it necessary, participate in a hearing in order to provide explanations and answer any questions of the parties and of the Jury.
The Jury shall assess the reliability and strength of evidence in its own judgment, after having considered the material in a comprehensive manner. On that basis, the Jury shall assess how to react to any refusal by a party to produce evidence or to any obstacles a party may put in the way of evidence being taken.
If there is a need to take any evidence outside of the place of hearing, the Jury may entrust this task to one of the arbitrators. The parties and their legal representatives are entitled to participate in the conduct of evidentiary proceedings by an arbitrator designated by the Jury.
If need be, the Jury may request that the court of competent jurisdiction take any evidence or perform any such action as the Jury itself cannot perform.
The Court shall charge advance payments on any actions carried out by the Jury pursuant to the “Tariff of fees” being in effect on the day the lawsuit is filed.
Records are prepared from the course of a hearing and other actions by the Jury or any actions performed by an arbitrator designated by the Jury pursuant to § 33 Sec. 4. The recording clerk is the Secretary or any other person designated by him.
The record shall be prepared in Polish, unless otherwise agreed by the parties. The recording clerk and the Chairman of the Jury shall sign the record.
The course of actions included in the record may be recorded by means of any recording equipment registering sound and/or vision; in such case, all participants should be given advance notice thereof.
The Court shall issue to the parties and their legal representatives – at their request – any certified copies of the records, awards and other documents in the case, charging fees defined in the Tariff of fees in effect on the day the lawsuit is filed and shall provide them with the opportunity to review the case file during business hours. The Court may, at the joint consent of the parties, deliver the record to the parties in the form of an electronic document. The record in the form of an electronic document can be signed by the recording clerk and certified by the Secretary.
A party may demand that the Court correct or supply the record – not later, however, than in 7 days from the moment of receiving the record by the party.
The Chairman of the Jury closes a hearing when the Jury deems the case sufficiently clarified or if he finds that the parties could present any and all circumstances which they deem relevant to the defense of their rights.
The Chairman of the Jury may reopen a hearing if, prior to the issuance of an award, the Jury deems it necessary.
The Jury decides upon a case by issuing an award. The award shall be binding upon the parties.
The President of the Court, the Committee of the Court and the Jury shall issue decisions in cases specified in these Rules and in other cases not requiring an award to be issued. The decisions cannot be appealed against.
Upon the Jury is appointed, its competences are carried out by the Committee of the Court.
An award should be issued within 30 days following closure of the case. The Chairman of the Jury may extend the above time limit by a specified period of time if this is necessary due to the complexity of the problems to be resolved or due to other circumstances of the case.
The Jury shall issue an award after holding in camera deliberations involving a discussion and a vote on the award and, if need be, also on the fundamental reasons for the resolution. The award shall be made by the majority of votes. If one of the arbitrators refuses to participate in a vote, the other arbitrators may hold a vote without him.
An arbitrator who does not agree with the majority in a vote may issue a dissenting opinion, making the relevant annotation besides his signature on the award. The said arbitrator may also append a justification for his dissenting opinion to the case file, which should be prepared within the same time as the justification for the award.
The President of the Court may demand that the Chairman of the Jury provides the reasons for the Jury’s failure to issue the award within the time limit fixed in Sec. 1.
at the request of a party – it should contain a decision on the costs of travel and accommodations of the arbitrators, which encumber the said party and which are deducted from the advance payment with which it was charged by the Court to cover arbitration costs.
The Jury may issue a partial award if a part of the demand or only some demands of the lawsuit or counter-lawsuit can be resolved.
By issuing a partial award, the Jury may also adjudicate the entire relief requested in the lawsuit or counter-lawsuit.
The Jury may issue a preliminary award, finding the claim justified in principle and continuing the proceedings (hearing) as to the disputed amount in the relief requested.
Submission of a motion to set aside a partial or preliminary award shall not halt further proceedings in the case.
An award is made in writing and delivered to the parties of the proceedings following payment of all costs of the proceeding.
The original copy of the award and all copies thereof must bear the signatures of all members of the Jury or at least two members of the same, specifying the reason for the lack of a signature of any of them, as well as bear the signatures of the Secretary and the President of the Court and the seal of the Court.
In signing the award, the Secretary and the President of the Court state that the Jury was appointed in accordance with these Rules and that the signatures of members of the Jury are authentic.
Prior to signing the award, the President of the Court may, without interfering in the merits of the decision, hand over the award to the Chairman of the Jury to make the necessary formal corrections and to rectify evident mistakes.
Provisions of this section shall apply mutatis mutandis to the decisions of the Court finalizing the case.
at the request of the parties give the settlement agreement the form of an award.
The essentials of the settlement agreement concluded before the Court should be incorporated into the record and certified by the signatures of the parties.
rectify any inaccuracies, clerical or accounting errors or any other evident mistakes in the text.
The Jury may also correct an award ex officio.
Mention of correction of the award under a decision of the Jury is made on the original copy of the award and on any copies thereof. Any further copies of the award shall be issued along with the corrections.
Any interpretation of the award by the Jury shall constitute an integral part thereof.
A party may, within one month following receipt of the award, file a motion, delivering a copy thereof to the other party, to decide upon any such demands made in the lawsuit or in the proceedings as the Jury failed to adjudicate in its award (supplement the award).
If the Jury deems the motion well founded, it shall issue a supplemental award within no more than 30 days following submission of the motion. § 37 Sec. 1 sentence 2 shall apply mutatis mutandis.
The Jury shall also issue an additional award in the event of resumption of proceedings pursuant to § 23 Sec. 3, after the actions indicated by a common court have been performed. The provision of Sec. 2 shall apply mutatis mutandis.
The Jury may express consent to publication of an award in whole or in part, ensuring the anonymity of, and respect for, the will of the parties of the proceedings.
A party may appeal against an award of the Jury (the Court of First Instance) to the Jury of Second Instance (the Court of Second Instance).
A party may file an appeal with the Jury within 14 days following receipt of the award.
The provisions relating to the proceeding before the Court of First Instance shall apply mutatis mutandis to the proceeding before the Court of Second Instance.
Prior to the commencement of proceedings before an arbitration court or a common court, a party to the dispute may request that the Court of Arbitration at the Centre for Mediation and Arbitration of Transport Sp. z o.o. (ltd) in Warsaw conduct, pursuant to these Rules, proceedings aimed at settling amicably the dispute specified in the request for mediation.
A request for mediation should: name the parties, specify the relief requested along with the circumstances warranting it, bear the signature of the party and enumerate the attachments. If the parties concluded a mediation agreement in writing, a copy thereof should be attached to the request.
The Secretary shall call upon the petitioner to pay within the time limit fixed – not exceeding three weeks – the half of the mediation fee in the amount specified in the “Tariff of fees” being in effect on the date of submission of the request; if the motion does not meet the requirements laid down in §46 Sec. 2, the Secretary shall call upon the petitioner to cure the deficiencies.
Following payment of the fees by the petitioner, the Secretary shall deliver the request to the opposing party and call upon it to submit a statement on its consent to participation in mediation proceedings and to pay half of the mediation fee within the time limit fixed not exceeding three weeks.
If the opposing party does not consent for mediation proceeding to be conducted, the mediation fee paid by the petitioner shall be returned thereto.
After the opposing party consents to mediation proceedings and pays half of the mediation fee, the Secretary shall invite the parties to appoint the mediator within no more than three weeks, at the same time sending the List of Mediators to the parties.
If the parties do not appoint the mediator, the President of the Court shall nominate the mediator from among the persons included in the List of Mediators.
The provisions relating to arbitrators, in particular: § 20, § 21, § 22 Sec. 1-5, shall apply to the mediator mutatis mutandis; provided, however, that the mediator shall be entitled to the rights of the Jury.
Following receipt of the case file regarding the dispute, the mediator shall organize a mediation meeting, hear the parties and provide the parties with proposals for settling the dispute amicably.
Prior to, or during the course of, the mediation meeting, the mediator may deal with the parties jointly or with each of them separately, in order to persuade them to conclude a settlement.
The mediator should make efforts to ensure that the mediation proceedings are completed at the first meeting, unless otherwise decided by the parties and the mediator.
No statements, explanations or motions of the parties made during the mediation meeting in connection with the possibility of settling the dispute amicably can be taken into consideration in arbitration or court proceedings, unless otherwise decided by the parties.
If the parties agree to conclude a settlement agreement, the mediator shall draw up a record containing the terms and conditions and the body of the settlement agreement. Mediation proceedings are completed upon the signature of the record by the parties and the mediator.
If mediation does not result in a settlement being concluded by the parties, mediation proceedings are terminated after the mediator appends to the case file his statement in writing to the effect that no settlement has been reached.
Upon the joint request of the parties to give the settlement reached in the mediation proceedings the form of an award, the President of the Court shall appoint the mediator as an arbitrator authorized to issue an award.
The Secretary shall call upon the parties to pay within the time limit not exceeding three weeks the arbitration fee due to the Court for resolving the dispute, taking into account any mediation fees paid. The amount of the arbitration fee is specified in the “Tariff of fees” being in effect on the date of submission of the motion.
The provisions of § 36-40 and § 42-44 of these Rules shall apply to an award issued as a result of mediation proceedings mutatis mutandis.
These Rules shall become effective as of 1st October 2013.