Third party funding na arbitragem e suas controvérsias

Abstract

In this project, through descriptive research, the aim is to analyze the points and counterpoints of Third Party Funding (TPF) on arbitration procedures, with the general objective of analyzing its mechanism in national and international arbitration procedures, to relate with controversial arguments. As well, the specific objectives are to explain the functioning of Arbitration Court procedures, in line with the application of Third-party-funding; point out the pros and cons to the Financing party; point out the pros and cons for the Financed part; explain the costs of the arbitration procedure in line with its reasons; demonstrate that, even with high costs, which often require financing, arbitration offers numerous benefits (secrecy, speed, choice of law to be applied, specialty of decisions, possibility of choosing the judge); present the arguments of scholars who, even though it is already expressly foreseen and possible for application, disagree with Third-party-funding; explain why they consider Thirdparty-funding to be a procedure incompatible with arbitration; demonstrate that the acceptance of Third-party-funding, which happens in the case of the majority of arbitrators, is based on solid and coherent arguments. The aforementioned propositions must be verified through investigations and research. These must be through sources: bibliographic, seeking to address the problem through the analysis of literature already published in the form of books, magazines, separate publications and written press, which involves the topic under analysis; documentary, through projects, laws, norms, resolutions, online research, among others that deal with the subject, seeking to compare past and present theories on the subject and analysis of practical cases, where it will be possible to contest the theory with empirical data, making critical comments on the assertiveness of the analyzed decisions.