Search for:
Category

Consent to Arbitrate

Category

Arbitral tribunals have the power under Singapore law to rule on their own jurisdiction, consistent with the widely recognised principle of Kompetenz-Kompetenz. In a recent decision, the Singapore High Court has confirmed that this power extends not only to questions concerning the validity or scope of any arbitration agreement under which the tribunal has been constituted, but also questions concerning the very existence of an arbitration agreement. This includes situations where a party to the…

In the Federal Supreme Court’s decision of June 18, 2014 (III ZB 89/13) the court had to decide the question whether a court’s decision on the validity of an arbitration agreement is binding for a succeeding arbitral proceeding based on the same arbitration agreement. The facts The decision is based on the following case: The dispute arose from a cooperation agreement and a lease agreement regarding a golf course. Both agreements contained an arbitration agreement.…

In a ruling of 1 October 2014, the Higher Regional Court Munich had to deal with an arbitration clause containing certain conditions for the appointment of the arbitrator which could not be met when the dispute arose. The court decided that nevertheless the arbitration proceedings were admissible. The applicant was a former limited partner of the respondent, a limited partnership. The dispute was about a compensation which the applicant claimed from the respondent. Pursuant to the…

In its decision of 24 July 2014, the German Federal Court of Justice discussed whether the arbitration agreement and the arbitration rules must be notarized if the main contract which contains the arbitration agreement is to be notarized (e.g. a share purchase agreement or a property purchase agreement). The Higher Regional Court of Munich unsettled arbitration practitioners and contract lawyers in Germany because the Court stated in an obiter dictum that an arbitration agreement might…