Are their weaknesses with this theory and what other principles are used for determining the law of procedure in arbitration cases?
The weakness in it lies in that it does not leave room for party autonomy. Some countries prefer to leave it to the parties to choose the lex arbitri, with the limitation that they must comply with the mandatory provisions of the law of the place of arbitration. Out of this theory a somewhat more extreme view has developed called the de-localization theory, which attempts to break away from the lex loci arbitri theory, i.e. where the law of procedure is chosen according to the place of arbitration. The de-localization theory states that the arbitration tribunal should conduct the procedure according to the rules determined by the parties or the tribunal and the procedure. National arbitration rules should not be applied.
Back
