Трудности перевода специальной литературы по коммерции и праву с английского языка на русский. Сидорова В.В - 44 стр.

consequently governed by and in accordance with international, or,
at least, non-national arbitration rules.
      Such an autonomous regime is no doubt possible as a theoretical
abstraction but has no place in the world of human affairs. The object
of arbitration is to secure an enforceable award. Enforcement involves
access to the machinery of the State in which the enforcement pro-
ceedings are to be taken, or in some other State, and this, in turn,
presupposes that the award is recognized by the law of the State in
question. Since all States impose at least some curbs on the power of
arbitrators, and in all States arbitral proceedings and awards are in
some measure subject to judicial review, it is not possible to divorce
arbitration proceedings from the law of the place where they are
conducted or are to be enforced. Indeed, arbitration law cannot be
regarded as a closed system, for insofar as it is alleged to answer all
queries of whatever character capable of arising in arbitration pro-
ceedings, it is uncodified and incapable of ascertainment, and, inso-
far, as it does not answer such questions, resort must be had to
another source of authority. The law of the forum may, of course,
permit reference to the law of another State (e. g. that selected by the
parties in their contract) to govern their rights, but that other law
will be allowed to operate only in the conditions and to the extent
permitted by the lex fori.
      So, the ultimate source of an arbitrator's power is to be found
by reference to the law of the place where the arbitration is held and/
or that of the place where the award is to be enforced, and degree of
autonomy possessed by the parties will depend on what is accorded to
them by such law. It is true that English law is more rigid than most
other legal systems, for it insists that, notwithstanding the terms of
the arbitration agreement, the arbitrator must decide the dispute in
accordance with the law (whether that of the forum or of some other
State) and not ex aequo et bono. English law has thus set its face
firmly against the institution of amicable composition, in which the
amiable compositeur is left free to decide the dispute according to his
view of what is equitable and without obligation to apply the rules of a
particular legal system.




                                – 44 –