In a business-to-business relationship, lack of jurisdiction must be raised promptly during the arbitration. If the tribunal makes a preliminary ruling confirming jurisdiction, an application to the court must be filed within 30 days after delivery of that ruling; an action to set aside the award generally has a 60-day period from delivery and is limited to statutory grounds. Enforcement review is narrower and does not replace a missed objection that the arbitration agreement is invalid or non-existent. An application to stop enforcement filed within 15 days after notice has suspensive effect, but it must rely on a permissible enforcement ground.
An arbitration clause is often buried in standard terms or the final article of an agreement. Many clients discover it only when they receive a notice from an arbitral tribunal. Decisions must then be made quickly: a jurisdiction challenge must be raised during the arbitration itself; waiting until enforcement is not an option.
The clause excludes ordinary proceedings, not court supervision
A valid arbitration clause moves the dispute from an ordinary court to arbitrators. It does not mean the state loses oversight. Act No. 244/2002 Coll. on Arbitration gives courts control over jurisdiction and the statutory grounds for setting aside an award. Subsequent enforcement review has a different, limited scope. For completeness, consumer disputes have their own stricter regime under Act No. 335/2014 Coll. on Consumer Arbitration; this article concerns business-to-business relationships.
First window: a jurisdiction objection during the proceedings
If you consider the clause invalid or non-existent, object to the arbitral tribunal’s jurisdiction no later than your first substantive step in the proceedings (Section 21(2) of Act No. 244/2002 Coll.). The tribunal initially decides the objection itself, but its conclusion is not final:
If the arbitral tribunal rules by an arbitral order that it has jurisdiction, the party that raised the objection may, within 30 days after delivery of the preliminary decision, apply to a court to decide the objection.
— Section 21(4) of Act No. 244/2002 Coll. (unofficial English translation)
You therefore need not wait for the final award: the jurisdiction issue can reach an ordinary court while arbitration is still in progress.
Second window: an action to set aside the arbitral award
An arbitral award that has been served and is no longer subject to review has the same effect between the parties as a final court judgment (Section 35 of Act No. 244/2002 Coll.). It can be overturned only through an action to set it aside on the statutory grounds in Section 40 of Act No. 244/2002 Coll.. These include the absence of an arbitration agreement or a dispute exceeding the clause’s scope. The action must be filed within 60 days of delivery of the award (Section 41). Under Section 40(4), the court must disregard grounds under Section 40(1)(a) that the party could have raised during the arbitration but failed to raise within the prescribed period. Inaction therefore narrows the subsequent court challenge as well.
Limited remedies in enforcement
If the creditor seeks enforcement of the award, the enforcement court examines whether it is a valid enforcement title. In non-consumer cases, however, enforcement is not another equivalent opportunity to challenge the validity or existence of the arbitration agreement. In its order 6ECdo/1/2022, paragraph 16, the Supreme Court of the Slovak Republic explained that the specific remedies under the Arbitration Act preclude jurisdiction from being reconsidered in enforcement proceedings; failure to use those remedies results in loss of the relevant objection. Older case law cannot be transposed without distinguishing consumer disputes from business-to-business disputes. The debtor’s own defence is governed by the Enforcement Code (Act No. 233/1995 Coll.):
On the grounds in paragraph 1, the debtor may apply to stop enforcement within 15 days of delivery of the notice commencing enforcement. The application must be reasoned and state all facts the debtor can rely on as at the filing date. Such an application has suspensive effect.
— Section 61k(2) of the Enforcement Code (unofficial English translation)
Later applications generally have no suspensive effect and are limited to new facts. The permissible enforcement grounds must therefore be assessed separately; they do not replace a missed challenge to the arbitral tribunal’s jurisdiction.
How we can help
We assess the clause’s validity and the available scope of defence, from a jurisdiction objection through an action to set aside the award to an application to stop enforcement, through arbitration and court representation. If you have also received a payment order, our opposition to a payment order service coordinates the defence.
Send the clause for review as soon as the first document from the arbitral tribunal arrives: the first window is the shortest of all.
This answer provides general information on the law as at 10 September 2026. It does not constitute legal services or replace an assessment of an individual case. The details of your situation may differ. Book a consultation to discuss them.
