Applicable Law To Arbitration Agreement

Lord Justice Moore-Bick found that a conciliation agreement in London has no close legal connection to the legal system of the insurance policy, the purpose of which has nothing to do with the purpose of resolving disputes. Instead, it has its closest and most real connection to the law of the place where arbitration is to take place and which exercises the necessary expertise in assistance and supervision to ensure the effectiveness of the procedure. In this case, the arbitration agreement had its closest and most real connection to English law, so english law governs the arbitration agreement. 3 This meaning of seat law has a significant harmonization effect on the determination of the law applicable to the validity of the arbitration agreement. It serves to avoid the frictions and contradictions that could arise if different laws applied to these issues. The freedom of decision created by the seat is important because the arbitration agreement is the very foundation of the court`s jurisdiction. This requires conflict rules of strict, fast, enforceable and generally accepted laws in order to avoid further complications when the jurisdiction of the Tribunal is unilaterally challenged. This is also consistent with the concept of partisan autonomy, which is one of the main maxima of international commercial arbitration. The seat is usually chosen by the parties or by the court or by the arbitration institution on their behalf. The choice of seat therefore becomes a direct or indirect choice of the parties with respect to the above issues. BCY (the applicant) and BCZ (the defendants) negotiated, but never signed, a sales contract. The SPA was never executed. Subsequently, BCZ conducted arbitration proceedings against BCY in respect of BSA litigation.

5 There are therefore only three different points of connection, the seat which is the strongest of them with regard to the determination of the law which governs all aspects of the validity of international arbitration agreements for six different legal issues (see points 2 and 4) of different legal issues. On the basis of these provisions, it was found that the parties made an explicit choice of English law to regulate the arbitration agreement. This conclusion was confirmed by the compromise clause itself, which provided in Article 14, paragraph 3, that “the arbitrator applies the provisions of the agreement.” The Tribunal interpreted the issue in such a way that the arbitrator was required to apply all the provisions, including the English regulatory clause, not only to material disputes, but also to jurisdictional issues.

Comments are closed.