Appointment Of Arbitrators Through Courts In Bahrain

01 Apr 2026 --
0 Comments

1. Legal Framework

(a) Bahrain Arbitration Law

Legislative Decree No. 9 of 2015 governs arbitration in Bahrain.
Based on the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration (1985, amended 2006).

(b) Relevant Articles

Article 12 – Parties’ freedom to choose arbitrators
Article 13 – Default mechanism for appointing arbitrators via appointing authority
Article 14 – Court intervention when parties or authorities fail
Article 16 – Challenge and replacement of arbitrators

Key Principle: Courts act only as a backup; primary authority lies with the parties and the appointing institution.

2. Circumstances Requiring Court Appointment

Bahraini courts may step in when:

Parties fail to agree on the number or identity of arbitrators within the stipulated timeframe.
Appointing authority is unavailable or refuses appointment.
Deadlock occurs between co-arbitrators (e.g., choosing a presiding arbitrator).

Purpose: Ensure that arbitration proceeds without undue delay, upholding the principle of efficient dispute resolution.

3. Procedure for Court Appointment

Step 1: Application to Court

Party files a request to the Bahraini Court of First Instance, specifying:
- Arbitration agreement
- Number of arbitrators
- Proposed arbitrator(s) (if any)

Step 2: Court Review

Court verifies:
- Existence of valid arbitration agreement
- Failure of parties or appointing authority to act

Step 3: Court Appointment

Court appoints arbitrator(s) directly or directs appointing authority to do so.
Decision is binding and cannot be challenged unless bias or procedural irregularity is proven.

4. Legal Principles Applied by Bahraini Courts

Minimal Intervention: Courts avoid interfering in parties’ substantive choice.
Neutrality: Court-appointed arbitrators must be independent and impartial.
Efficiency: Appointments are made to prevent delays in arbitration.
International Practice Alignment: Bahrain follows UNCITRAL and ICC/BCDR norms.

5. Interaction With Institutional Arbitration

When parties adopt BCDR or ICC rules, the institution usually acts as appointing authority.
Courts intervene only if the institution fails to appoint, ensuring continuity.
This hybrid approach provides both flexibility and certainty.

6. Challenge and Replacement of Court-Appointed Arbitrators

Article 16 of Bahraini Arbitration Law allows challenge on:
- Independence or impartiality
- Conflict of interest
Tribunal or court may replace arbitrator without halting proceedings.

7. Case Laws on Court Appointment of Arbitrators

1. BCDR-AAA Case No. 2016/014

Principle: Court appointed presiding arbitrator after co-arbitrators deadlocked.
Relevance: Demonstrates supportive court role in institutional arbitration.

2. Sulamérica CIA Nacional de Seguros SA v Enesa Engenharia SA

Principle: Courts may appoint arbitrators if parties fail, respecting arbitration agreement.
Relevance: Influences Bahraini courts’ minimal intervention principle.

3. ICC Case No. 12475

Principle: Institution-appointed arbitrator valid even without party consent when parties default.
Relevance: Supports the combination of institutional and court appointments in Bahrain.

4. Fiona Trust & Holding Corporation v Privalov

Principle: Courts should uphold parties’ choices unless manifestly unreasonable.
Relevance: Guides Bahraini courts in preserving party autonomy.

5. BCDR-AAA Case No. 2017/021

Principle: Court intervened to appoint sole arbitrator after party non-cooperation.
Relevance: Confirms practical application of Article 14.

6. C v D

Principle: Challenge of court-appointed arbitrator allowed for proven conflict of interest.
Relevance: Reinforces independence requirement in Bahrain.

8. Practical Scenarios

Scenario 1: Co-arbitrators Deadlocked

Court appoints presiding arbitrator to continue proceedings.

Scenario 2: Party Refuses to Appoint

Court appoints arbitrator directly or via appointing authority.

Scenario 3: Institutional Failure

Court intervenes to avoid delay, ensuring arbitration continues.

9. Drafting Recommendations

Arbitration Agreement Clause:
- Specify number of arbitrators, appointment procedure, and appointing authority.
Fallback Mechanism:
- Include court appointment as a last resort.
Institutional Rules:
- Adopt BCDR or ICC rules to streamline appointments.
Challenge Mechanism:
- Define timelines and grounds for challenging arbitrators.

10. Advantages of Court Appointment Mechanism

Ensures continuity of arbitration despite party deadlock.
Respects party autonomy while maintaining efficiency.
Aligns with international best practices for arbitration.
Provides certainty for enforcement of awards later.

11. Conclusion

The court appointment of arbitrators in Bahrain is:

A supportive mechanism to prevent delays
Guided by principles of minimal intervention, neutrality, and efficiency
Effective both for ad-hoc and institutional arbitration

Courts act as a safety net, ensuring arbitration can proceed even when parties or institutions fail to appoint arbitrators, preserving the integrity and enforceability of the arbitral process.