[2000] ECR I-9305) so that the Ingmar GB Ltd v Eaton Leonard Technologies Ltd choice of an arbitration seat or proper law of the underlying contract which will not give effect to the Regulation is null & void or inoperative for purposes of s 9(4) EAA. Inoperative clauses: evidences intention to arbitrate but the clause may be vague, parties’ ambiguous or pathological. Referral to non-existent institution: YBCA, 1997, vol Distributor v Manufacturer, XXII, p 266 (referred parties to ICC) YBCA, 1990, vol XV, p 594 (referred parties to JCAA) Hennex Corp v GMI Inc, Institution no longer in existence having been abolished by statute – Dalimpex Ltd [2003] 172 OAC 312 (CA, Ontario) v Janicki Referral to arbitration in an unspecified third country Lucky Goldstar (HK) – Int’l YBCA, 1995, vol XX, p. 280 (referred parties to ad Ltd v Ng Moo Kee Eng Ltd, hoc arbitration) Clause can become inoperative through its waiver ACD Tridon Inc v Tridon – [2002] NSWSC 896, YBCA, 2004, vol XXIX, p 533 Australia Pty Ltd Incapable of being performed Drafting Exercise agree to arbitrate scope of the agreement finality of award institution or rules seat of arbitration arbitrators: number, method of appointment & qualification, appointing authority language of arbitration time costs confidentiality waiver of sovereign immunity Defective arbitration clause Inconsistency Uncertainty Relevance of court attitude see: Lucky Goldstar (HK) Ltd v Ng Moo Kee Engr Ltd – Int’l [1993] 2 HKLR 73 Cases Fiona Trust and Holding Corp v Privalov 254 also known as [2008] 1 Lloyd’s Rep Premium Nafta Products Ltd & Others v Fili Shipping Co Ltd & Others [2007] UKHL 40 Entico Corp Ltd v UNESCO 673 [2008] 1 Lloyd’s Rep Dallah Real Estate & Tourism Holding Co v Ministry of Religious affairs, Government of Pakistan, [2009] EWCA Civ 755, [2009] WLR (D) 250 on parties to – the arbitration agreement. See the UKSC decision at [2010] UKSC 46 where the decision
Ingmar GB Ltd v Eaton Leonard Technologies Ltd [2000] ECR I-9305) so that the choice of an arbitration seat or proper law of the underlying contract which will not give effect to the Regulation is null & void or inoperative for purposes of s 9(4) EAA. Inoperative clauses: evidences parties’ intention to arbitrate but the clause may be vague, ambiguous or pathological. Referral to non-existent institution: Distributor v Manufacturer, YBCA, 1997, vol XXII, p 266 (referred parties to ICC) Hennex Corp v GMI Inc, YBCA, 1990, vol XV, p 594 (referred parties to JCAA) Institution no longer in existence having been abolished by statute – Dalimpex Ltd v Janicki [2003] 172 OAC 312 (CA, Ontario) Referral to arbitration in an unspecified third country – Lucky Goldstar Int’l (HK) Ltd v Ng Moo Kee Eng Ltd, YBCA, 1995, vol XX, p. 280 (referred parties to ad hoc arbitration) Clause can become inoperative through its waiver – ACD Tridon Inc v Tridon Australia Pty Ltd [2002] NSWSC 896, YBCA, 2004, vol XXIX, p 533 Incapable of being performed Drafting Exercise agree to arbitrate scope of the agreement finality of award institution or rules seat of arbitration arbitrators: number, method of appointment & qualification, appointing authority language of arbitration time costs confidentiality waiver of sovereign immunity Defective arbitration clause Inconsistency Uncertainty Relevance of court attitude – see: Lucky Goldstar Int’l (HK) Ltd v Ng Moo Kee Engr Ltd [1993] 2 HKLR 73 Cases Fiona Trust and Holding Corp v Privalov [2008] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 254 also known as Premium Nafta Products Ltd & Others v Fili Shipping Co Ltd & Others [2007] UKHL 40 Entico Corp Ltd v UNESCO [2008] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 673 Dallah Real Estate & Tourism Holding Co v Ministry of Religious affairs, Government of Pakistan, [2009] EWCA Civ 755, [2009] WLR (D) 250 – on parties to the arbitration agreement. See the UKSC decision at [2010] UKSC 46 where the decision
ADR-lecture-3.docx