UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules in Bangladesh 2026: Ad Hoc Arbitration, the PCA and Enforcement

UNCITRAL arbitration rules Bangladesh parties use: the 2026 position

UNCITRAL arbitration rules Bangladesh parties sign up to give them a complete procedural code for ad hoc arbitration without paying an institution to run the case. The rules supply the notice, the tribunal, the timetable and the award; the Arbitration Act 2001, which is based on the UNCITRAL Model Law, supplies the mandatory framework whenever the seat is in Bangladesh; and the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague stands behind the system as the body that designates, or acts as, the appointing authority when the parties cannot agree.[1] [2] [3]

This guide explains which version of the rules applies, how they interact with the Act, how tribunals are constituted, what the PCA does and charges, the PCA cases involving Bangladesh, the 2021 Expedited Rules, and how awards are enforced in Dhaka and abroad. Clause wording, setting aside and enforcement practice are covered in companion TRW guides, which we link rather than repeat.

Summary: The UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules are the standard choice for ad hoc arbitration involving Bangladeshi parties. Where the seat is Dhaka, the Arbitration Act 2001 governs and its mandatory provisions prevail over the rules; where the seat is abroad, only the Act's foreign award provisions apply. If no appointing authority is agreed, the PCA Secretary-General designates one, for a non-refundable fee of EUR 3,000. Awards are enforced as decrees, and foreign UNCITRAL awards are recognised under the New York Convention, to which Bangladesh acceded in 1992.

Key point: An UNCITRAL clause that names no appointing authority still works, but it adds a step. Article 6 of the rules sends the parties to the PCA Secretary-General for a designation, and the Act sends a failed appointment to a Bangladeshi court only where the agreed procedure provides no other means. Naming the authority in the contract removes thirty days, a fee and an argument.

At a glance

Swipe or scroll →

Table of Contents

What the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules are and which version applies

The UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules are a procedural code prepared by the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law and first recommended by the General Assembly in resolution 31/98 of 15 December 1976.[1] They create no institution. Parties adopt them by contract, and the tribunal and, where needed, an appointing authority apply them without a secretariat.

There are four texts in circulation. The 1976 rules may still govern older contracts. The 2010 revision, recommended in resolution 65/22, modernised the procedure. The 2013 text added article 1(4), bringing in the UNCITRAL Rules on Transparency for treaty-based investor-State cases. The 2021 text added article 1(5) and an appendix containing the UNCITRAL Expedited Arbitration Rules, which apply only where the parties so agree.[1]

The article 1(2) presumption

Article 1(2) answers the version question for most contracts. Parties to an arbitration agreement concluded after 15 August 2010 are presumed to have referred to the rules in effect on the date the arbitration commences, unless they agreed to a particular version. The presumption does not apply where the agreement was concluded after that date by accepting an offer made before it.[1]

For UNCITRAL arbitration rules Bangladesh contracts signed in 2015 that refer simply to "the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules", a dispute commenced in 2026 will run under the 2021 text. A contract signed in 2008, such as a long-term gas, power or infrastructure agreement, does not benefit from the presumption, and the parties should expect argument about whether the 1976 text governs. The difference is real: the fee review procedure discussed below exists only in the 2010 and later versions.[5]

Treaty cases and the Transparency Rules

The Rules on Transparency apply automatically only to investor-State arbitrations under treaties concluded on or after 1 April 2014; for older treaties they apply only by agreement.[1] Our guide to ICSID investment arbitration in Bangladesh explains which Bangladesh treaties offer an UNCITRAL option at all.

How UNCITRAL arbitration rules Bangladesh law recognises fit with the Arbitration Act 2001

The rules are a contract; the Act is the law of the seat. Section 3(1) applies the Arbitration Act 2001 where the place of arbitration is in Bangladesh, and section 3(2) applies sections 45 to 47 on foreign awards even where the seat is abroad.[2] The Act expressly covers arbitration "whether or not administered by permanent institution", so ad hoc arbitration sits within it on equal terms with BIAC or ICC cases.[2]

Two provisions link the rules to the statute. Section 4(2) provides that wherever the Act refers to the parties' agreement, that agreement includes any arbitration rules referred to in it. Section 25(1) requires the tribunal to follow the procedure agreed by the parties, subject to the Act.[2] Every "unless otherwise agreed" in the Act is therefore answered, in an UNCITRAL case, by the rules.

The rules accept this hierarchy. Article 1(3) provides that where any rule conflicts with a provision of the law applicable to the arbitration from which the parties cannot derogate, that provision prevails.[1] In a Dhaka-seated case the parties must therefore identify which provisions of the Act are mandatory, such as the court's powers under sections 7A and 12, the sixty-day setting-aside regime and the court's power over fee disputes, before relying on the rules alone.

A Model Law statute, read on its own terms

The Act is substantially based on the 1985 UNCITRAL Model Law but does not adopt the 2006 amendments. Chambers records that in STX Corporation v Meghna Group, 64 DLR (2012) 550, the court held that only Model Law provisions actually enacted in the Act bind Bangladeshi courts, and that where the Act departs from the Model Law the courts must give effect to the departure.[3] The family resemblance between the rules and the Model Law helps, but it is not a substitute for reading the Act.

The most important departure concerns internationality. Section 2(c) treats an arbitration as international commercial arbitration where at least one party is a foreign national or resident, a body incorporated abroad, an entity managed and controlled abroad, or a foreign government.[2] The test turns on the parties, not the place of business, and it decides which court acts in support of an UNCITRAL case. The Bangla text prevails over the English text in any conflict.[2] The wider framework is set out in our guide to arbitration law in Bangladesh.

Starting an ad hoc arbitration under the UNCITRAL Rules

An UNCITRAL arbitration begins with a notice of arbitration under article 3. It must identify the parties, the arbitration agreement and the contract, describe the claim, the amount and the relief sought, and propose the number of arbitrators, language and place if these are not agreed. It may also propose an appointing authority and a sole arbitrator, or notify the claimant's own appointment.[1]

Under article 3(2), the proceedings commence on the date the respondent receives the notice.[1] Section 27 of the Act applies its own commencement test only "unless otherwise agreed", and section 55(2) uses the section 27 date for limitation purposes.[2] Because the two tests both turn on the respondent's receipt of a notice, a notice that meets article 3 should satisfy section 27 as well. Serve it in a way that can be proved: article 2 deems delivery at the place of business, habitual residence or mailing address effective, and allows email only to a designated or authorised address.[1]

The response and early objections

The respondent has thirty days to respond, and may include a jurisdictional plea, counter-proposals on the appointing authority and tribunal, and any counterclaim. A late or incomplete response does not hold up constitution of the tribunal.[1] Jurisdictional objections must be raised no later than the statement of defence under article 23(2), which mirrors section 19 of the Act.[1] [2]

Constituting the tribunal under UNCITRAL arbitration rules Bangladesh parties agree

If the parties have not agreed the number and do not agree on a sole arbitrator within thirty days of the respondent receiving the notice, article 7 provides for three; the Act has the same default.[1] [2] Each side appoints one arbitrator and the two choose the presiding arbitrator. If the respondent does not appoint within thirty days, or the co-arbitrators fail to agree within thirty days, the appointing authority steps in.[1]

The list procedure

Under article 8(2), the appointing authority sends both parties an identical list of at least three names; each party has fifteen days to strike and rank them, and the authority appoints from the names approved, or at its discretion if that fails.[1] Article 6(7) requires it to consider the advisability of an arbitrator of a nationality other than the parties'.[1]

Where the Bangladeshi courts come in

Section 12 of the Act gives the courts default powers of appointment. Where the statutory default procedure applies and a party fails to appoint, or the co-arbitrators fail to agree, within thirty days, the District Judge appoints in a domestic case and the Chief Justice or a Supreme Court judge he designates appoints in an international commercial arbitration.[2] The appointment must be made within sixty days of the application and the decision is final.[2]

Section 12(7) is the provision that matters for UNCITRAL cases. Where the parties have agreed an appointment procedure and a party, the arbitrators or "any third party" fails to act under it, a party may apply to the court "unless the agreement on the appointment procedure provides other means" for securing the appointment.[2] The UNCITRAL Rules do provide other means: article 6(4) allows any party to ask the PCA Secretary-General to designate a substitute appointing authority if the first one refuses or fails to act.[1] A party that runs straight to court should expect the argument that the agreed machinery has not been exhausted.

The appointing authority and the PCA's role

The appointing authority is what makes UNCITRAL arbitration rules Bangladesh contracts adopt work without an institution. It appoints arbitrators when appointments fail, decides challenges, can replace an arbitrator and reviews the tribunal's fees.[1] Parties can name any institution or person. Common choices are an arbitral institution, a chamber of commerce or the PCA Secretary-General.

Designation under article 6

Where no appointing authority is agreed, any party may propose one or more institutions or persons, including the PCA Secretary-General. If all parties have not agreed within thirty days of that proposal reaching them, any party may request the PCA Secretary-General to designate the appointing authority.[1] Time limits for referring matters to the appointing authority are suspended while the designation is pending, so a respondent cannot run down the clock by refusing to engage.[1]

A designation request to the PCA must enclose the clause, the notice of arbitration and its date of service, any response, the parties' nationalities, any arbitrators already appointed, candidates proposed and rejected, a power of attorney and the fee.[4] The non-refundable processing fee is EUR 3,000, paid in advance by bank transfer.[4] [6] The PCA's own page sets no processing timetable, so build a margin into any limitation analysis.[4]

The Secretary-General acting as appointing authority

Parties can avoid the designation step by naming the Secretary-General as the appointing authority in the clause. When acting, the Secretary-General generally follows the UNCITRAL list procedure for a sole or presiding arbitrator, uses discretion for a second arbitrator, and is not limited to any list or panel.[5] On challenges, he may decide directly or consult a three-person committee, a majority of whose members must be of nationalities different from those of the parties.[5] The fee for acting is also EUR 3,000.[6]

Challenges: the rules and section 14

Under article 13, a party must give notice of a challenge within fifteen days of being notified of the appointment or learning of the circumstances. If the other parties do not agree and the arbitrator does not withdraw within fifteen days, the challenger must seek a decision from the appointing authority within thirty days of its notice.[1] The Act's default procedure is different: written reasons within thirty days, a decision by the tribunal itself, and an appeal to the High Court Division within thirty days of the tribunal's decision under section 14(3).[2]

Section 14(1) lets parties agree their own challenge procedure, and the rules are such an agreement. The statutory appeal in section 14(4) is drafted around a decision of the tribunal under section 14(3), not an appointing authority's decision.[2] Whether such a decision can be taken to the High Court Division has not, so far as we are aware, been decided. Treat the fifteen-day UNCITRAL deadline as operative, because section 6 deems unraised objections waived.[2]

Fee review: article 41 and section 50

Fees are where ad hoc arbitration most often goes wrong, and the 2010 and later rules give the appointing authority a real role. Promptly after constitution, the tribunal must tell the parties how it proposes to set its fees; any party may refer that proposal to the appointing authority within fifteen days. After the award, any party may refer the tribunal's fee determination for review within fifteen days, and if no appointing authority exists, the review is carried out by the PCA Secretary-General.[1] Adjustments are binding on the tribunal and do not delay enforcement of the rest of the award.[1]

The Act has its own mechanism. Section 50 allows a party to apply to the court where the tribunal refuses to deliver the award until its costs are paid, if the fees were not fixed by written agreement; the court can order delivery against payment into court and decide what is reasonable.[2] In a Dhaka-seated UNCITRAL case, the safest course is a written fee agreement with the tribunal at the outset, which closes the section 50 gap and gives article 41 a fixed baseline. In May 2026 the Law Minister said arbitrator fees are so high that ordinary businesspeople avoid the system.[14]

The Permanent Court of Arbitration and Bangladesh

The PCA is an intergovernmental organisation established by the 1899 Hague Convention on the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes. Despite its name, it is not a court. Headquartered at the Peace Palace in The Hague, it facilitates arbitration, conciliation and other proceedings among states, state entities, intergovernmental organisations and private parties, and its Secretary-General performs the appointing authority functions described above. With Botswana's accession, which took effect on 4 April 2026, the PCA has 128 Contracting Parties.[7]

Bangladesh is one of them. The Netherlands treaty database, which records the depositary's register, shows Bangladesh's accession to the 1907 Convention for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes on 28 December 2011, with entry into force on 26 February 2012.[8] Private parties do not need any state's membership to use PCA services: the Accord arbitrations discussed below were between trade unions and companies.[11]

What the PCA administers

In its February 2026 press release, the PCA reported that its International Bureau was administering eight inter-state arbitrations and one other inter-state proceeding, 92 arbitrations under investment treaties or national investment laws, 93 arbitrations under contracts involving a state or other public entity, and seven other proceedings.[7] Contract cases with public entities are its largest category, which matters for Bangladeshi state corporations and their foreign counterparties.

When the PCA acts as registry, it charges by time. Its published rates are EUR 275 an hour for the Secretary-General and Deputy Secretary-General, EUR 195 for legal staff and EUR 145 for assistant legal staff, and hearing facilities are free to tribunals for which it acts as registry.[6] PCA support therefore sits between unsupported and fully administered arbitration: the parties pay for the support they use, not a scale fee.

PCA-administered cases involving Bangladesh

Two sets of PCA cases show the range of disputes that touch Bangladesh: one between states under a treaty, the other between private parties under the UNCITRAL Rules.

Bay of Bengal Maritime Boundary Arbitration (Bangladesh v India)

Bangladesh instituted proceedings against India on 8 October 2009 under article 287 of, and Annex VII to, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. The case was registered as PCA Case No 2010-16, with the PCA as registry, before a five-member tribunal presided over by Professor Rüdiger Wolfrum and including Judge Thomas A Mensah, Dr Pemmaraju Sreenivasa Rao, Professor Ivan Shearer and Judge Jean-Pierre Cot. The award was made on 7 July 2014, with a concurring and dissenting opinion by Dr Rao.[9]

Of the 25,602 square kilometres in dispute, the award gave Bangladesh 19,467, about 76 per cent. The award was reported as final and not subject to appeal.[10] The same report noted the earlier judgment of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea of 14 March 2012 in Bangladesh's boundary case with Myanmar, which was decided in Hamburg rather than at the PCA.[10] Annex VII arbitration is a public international law procedure, not a commercial one; our public international law practice covers state-to-state matters of this kind.

The Bangladesh Accord arbitrations

The second set of cases arose from the Accord on Fire and Building Safety in Bangladesh, signed after the Rana Plaza collapse. IndustriALL Global Union and UNI Global Union brought two arbitrations against two global fashion brands, whose names were kept confidential, alleging that the brands had failed to require their supplier factories to remedy safety hazards. The arbitrations were conducted under the 2010 UNCITRAL Rules with The Hague as the seat and the PCA as registry. On 4 September 2017 the tribunal held that the claims were admissible and within its jurisdiction under article 5 of the Accord.[11]

Both cases settled, in December 2017 and January 2018, with the brands paying more than US$2.3 million towards remediation in Bangladeshi garment factories, and the PCA announced in July 2018 that the cases were closed.[12] They remain the clearest example of UNCITRAL arbitration rules Bangladesh disputes being resolved with PCA support, and they showed that confidentiality and transparency in a multi-party case can be settled by procedural order.[11]

What the cases tell commercial parties

Neither set of cases was a contract dispute between a Bangladeshi company and a foreign counterparty, and the PCA does not publish every contract case it administers. For a commercial party, the practical lesson is that naming the PCA Secretary-General as appointing authority, or agreeing that the PCA will act as registry, is a credible neutral option when neither side will accept the other's home institution.

The UNCITRAL Expedited Arbitration Rules

The Expedited Rules came into effect on 19 September 2021 and were recommended by the General Assembly on 9 December 2021.[1] They operate as a modification of the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules and apply only where the parties have agreed to them; there is no value threshold that triggers them automatically.[1] A clause that refers only to "the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules" does not opt in.

How the expedited timetable works

The claimant serves its statement of claim with the notice of arbitration, and the notice must propose an appointing authority and an arbitrator. The respondent has fifteen days to respond to the notice, and fifteen days from constitution of the tribunal to file its defence.[1] Under the Expedited Rules there is one arbitrator unless the parties agree otherwise; if they cannot agree on the person within fifteen days of a proposal, the appointing authority appoints.[1] If the parties have not agreed an appointing authority within fifteen days, any party may ask the PCA Secretary-General to designate one or to serve as appointing authority himself.[1]

The tribunal must consult the parties within fifteen days of its constitution. It may decide the case without a hearing if no party asks for one, may refuse document production requests unless all parties join them, and may conduct the case remotely.[1] Counterclaims must come no later than the defence.[1] An award under the Expedited Rules is due within six months of constitution. In exceptional circumstances the tribunal may extend that to a total of nine months; beyond nine months, an extension needs every party's agreement, failing which a party may ask for the case to continue under the ordinary rules.[1]

Leaving the expedited track

The parties may agree at any time to leave the Expedited Rules, and a tribunal may so decide at one party's request in exceptional circumstances; the same tribunal then continues under the ordinary rules.[1] Opt in to the Expedited Rules only for genuinely suitable disputes: modest sums, documents-based claims and limited disclosure.

Expedited arbitration with a Dhaka seat

The Act imposes no time limit for making an award, so the six-month rule is purely contractual and does not conflict with it.[3] The risk lies elsewhere: one court application under section 12 can consume the whole expedited timetable. An expedited clause under UNCITRAL arbitration rules Bangladesh parties sign should therefore name the appointing authority and the arbitrator's qualifications so that no court step is needed.

Running the proceedings: seat, interim measures, costs and confidentiality

Where the parties have not agreed the place of arbitration, article 18 lets the tribunal determine it, and sections 26 and 38(4) of the Act are to the same effect.[1] [2] Leaving the seat open is a mistake: the seat decides which courts supervise the case, whether section 7A relief is available and whether the award is domestic or foreign.

Interim measures

Article 26 lets the tribunal order measures to preserve the status quo, protect the process, preserve assets and preserve evidence, on a test of irreparable harm and a reasonable possibility of success.[1] Section 21 of the Act confers a parallel power and lets the court enforce the tribunal's order.[2]

Before the tribunal exists, parties to UNCITRAL arbitration rules Bangladesh cases seated in Dhaka need the court. Section 7A allows the High Court Division, in an international commercial arbitration, or the District Judge, in other cases, to grant interim measures before or during the proceedings and until enforcement.[2] After Accom Travels v Oman Air, 27 BLC (2022) 596, that power is not available in support of a foreign-seated arbitration, although relief may be sought at the enforcement stage.[3] A case seated in Singapore or London has no Bangladeshi interim relief to fall back on until there is an award.

Costs and deposits

Article 40 defines recoverable costs, including the fees of the appointing authority and the PCA Secretary-General; article 42 makes the unsuccessful party bear costs in principle, subject to apportionment; and article 43 allows equal deposits.[1] Section 49 of the Act also makes deposits payable in equal shares.[2] A practical breakdown is in our guide to the cost of arbitration in Bangladesh.

Confidentiality

The Act is silent on confidentiality.[3] The rules protect only the award: article 34(5) allows it to be made public with all parties' consent or where disclosure is legally required, or needed to protect a legal right or for court proceedings.[1] Pleadings, evidence and hearings are not covered. Parties who need confidentiality should provide for it in the clause or seek a procedural order at the first conference, as the tribunal did in the Accord arbitrations.[11]

How UNCITRAL arbitration rules Bangladesh awards are enforced

Article 34 requires the award to be in writing, reasoned unless the parties agree otherwise, signed, dated and stating the place of arbitration.[1] Section 38 of the Act imposes the same requirements and requires a signed copy to be delivered to each party.[2] Delivery matters because the sixty-day period to set aside a Dhaka award runs from receipt, so the tribunal should deliver by a method that leaves a record.

Awards made in Bangladesh

An UNCITRAL award made at a Bangladeshi seat is a Bangladeshi award. It can be challenged only by an application under section 42 on the grounds in section 43, and once the time for challenge has expired or a challenge has been refused, it is enforced under the Code of Civil Procedure as if it were a decree of the court within whose jurisdiction it was made and signed.[2] Our guides to how to set aside an arbitral award in Bangladesh and to enforcement of arbitral awards in Bangladesh cover each stage in detail.

The UNCITRAL model clause includes an optional waiver of "any form of recourse" against the award, effective only insofar as the applicable law allows it.[1] The Act contains no provision allowing parties to exclude the setting-aside remedy, and an award can be set aside only on the grounds in section 43.[3] A Bangladeshi party should not rely on the waiver to shut out a challenge to a Dhaka-seated award.

Foreign-seated UNCITRAL awards

An UNCITRAL award made outside Bangladesh is a foreign arbitral award. Under section 45 it is binding, may be relied on by way of defence or set-off, and is executed by the District Judge's court in Dhaka on an application attaching the authenticated award, the arbitration agreement and evidence that the award is foreign.[2] Recognition may be refused only on the grounds in section 46.[2]

Bangladesh acceded to the New York Convention on 6 May 1992, with effect from 4 August 1992, and the status table records no reservations.[13] The Act draws no distinction between Convention and non-Convention awards and allows no sovereign immunity defence at enforcement.[3] An UNCITRAL award therefore stands on the same footing as an ICC or SIAC award; the procedure is set out in our guide to foreign arbitral award enforcement in Bangladesh.

Enforcing abroad against a Bangladeshi party

Abroad, a Dhaka-seated award benefits from the Convention in the other 171 Contracting States, subject to their declarations; India, for example, applies both reciprocity and commercial reservations.[13] Check those declarations wherever the losing party holds assets before choosing the seat.

Choosing ad hoc UNCITRAL arbitration or an institution

An ad hoc UNCITRAL case can cost less and is fully party-controlled, but it leaves no institution to chase a slow tribunal, check the award or hold deposits. The table sets out the trade-offs; on a phone, scroll it sideways.

Three questions usually decide the choice. Will both sides co-operate once a dispute arises? If not, an institution is worth its fee. Is the counterparty a state entity? Then a neutral appointing authority such as the PCA Secretary-General may be the only one both sides accept. Is the claim modest? Then consider the Expedited Rules or BIAC. Our analyses of BIAC arbitration in Bangladesh and international commercial arbitration in Bangladesh cover the institutional alternatives.

Drafting and running UNCITRAL arbitration rules Bangladesh contracts can rely on

The UNCITRAL model clause is short, and the rules' own note tells parties to add the appointing authority, the number of arbitrators, the place and the language.[1] For a Bangladeshi contract we would add the governing law of the contract, the seat stated as a seat rather than a venue, the version of the rules if the parties want to fix it, and whether the Expedited Rules apply. Sample wording and drafting notes for an ad hoc UNCITRAL clause are in our guide to the arbitration clause in Bangladesh.

Once a dispute arises, the sequence below keeps the case moving and protects the award.

Swipe or scroll →

Mistakes to avoid

• No appointing authority: it adds a PCA designation step and gives a reluctant respondent something to argue about.[1]
• No seat: the tribunal will choose one, and that choice will decide the supervisory court, interim relief and how the award is enforced.[1]
• Assuming the Expedited Rules apply: they need an express opt-in.[1]
• No fee agreement: without one, section 50 and article 41 disputes can delay delivery of the award.[2]
• Late challenges: the fifteen-day limit in article 13 is shorter than the Act's thirty days.[1]

UNCITRAL arbitration rules Bangladesh practice: what to watch in 2026

Reform of the Act is the main issue. At a BIAC seminar reported on 22 May 2026, the Law Minister, Md Asaduzzaman, said the Arbitration Act 2001 has limitations that "can be fixed easily", pointing to high arbitrator fees and long delays; the BIAC chairman called the proposed reforms of the Act and the Commercial Courts Act 2026 "important milestones".[14] Any amendment that tightens fee control, allows interim relief for foreign-seated arbitrations or sets time limits would change how ad hoc UNCITRAL cases are run.

Until the Act changes, the rules' fee review, the PCA Secretary-General's fallback role and the Expedited Rules give parties tools the statute does not. Using them deliberately, rather than through boilerplate, is the most effective risk control available in UNCITRAL arbitration rules Bangladesh disputes, wherever the seat.

TRW advises on drafting UNCITRAL clauses, on applications to the PCA, on tribunal constitution and challenges, and on enforcement of ad hoc awards in Bangladesh and abroad. Explore our international arbitration practice or contact TRW.

Frequently asked questions

Can Bangladeshi parties use the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules?

Yes. The Arbitration Act 2001 covers arbitration whether or not administered by an institution, and section 25 requires the tribunal to follow the procedure the parties agree, which includes the rules.[2] Chambers notes that UNCITRAL Rules are commonly agreed for ad hoc arbitrations in Bangladesh.[3]

Which version of the UNCITRAL Rules applies to my contract?

For an arbitration agreement concluded after 15 August 2010, the rules in effect when the arbitration commences apply unless the parties chose a particular version. Older agreements need case-by-case analysis.[1]

What happens if the clause does not name an appointing authority?

Any party may propose one. If no agreement is reached within thirty days, any party may ask the PCA Secretary-General to designate one, for a non-refundable fee of EUR 3,000.[1] [4]

Does the PCA administer UNCITRAL cases?

It can act as registry if the parties or tribunal agree, charging hourly rates, and its Secretary-General designates or acts as appointing authority. Its February 2026 caseload included 93 contract-based arbitrations involving states or public entities.[6] [7]

Is Bangladesh a member of the Permanent Court of Arbitration?

Yes. Bangladesh acceded to the 1907 Hague Convention on 28 December 2011, with effect from 26 February 2012.[8]

What was the Bay of Bengal arbitration?

An UNCLOS Annex VII arbitration brought by Bangladesh against India, with the PCA as registry. The award of 7 July 2014 gave Bangladesh 19,467 of the 25,602 square kilometres in dispute.[9] [10]

When do the UNCITRAL Expedited Rules apply?

Only where the parties expressly agree. They provide for a sole arbitrator and an award within six months of constitution, extendable to nine months in exceptional circumstances.[1]

Which Bangladeshi court appoints an arbitrator if the process fails?

The District Judge in a domestic arbitration, and the Chief Justice or a Supreme Court judge he designates in an international commercial arbitration, under section 12. Where the agreed rules provide another route, such as the PCA fallback, that route comes first.[2]

How is a foreign UNCITRAL award enforced in Bangladesh?

By application to the District Judge's court in Dhaka under section 45, with the authenticated award and arbitration agreement. Refusal is possible only on the section 46 grounds.[2]

Can the parties waive any challenge to a Dhaka-seated UNCITRAL award?

The rules' model waiver works only where the applicable law allows it, and the Act contains no provision for excluding the setting-aside remedy. Do not rely on it for a Bangladeshi seat.[1] [3]