210 likes | 364 Views
International Commercial Arbitration Arbitrability and the Impact of Mitsubishi and Eco Swiss decision. Nikola Antlová, Jakub Burget, Veronika Hradilová 2011. Arbitrability - definition. Consists of : Arbitr(ation) Ability = ability to be arbitrated
E N D
InternationalCommercialArbitrationArbitrability and the Impact of Mitsubishi and Eco Swiss decision Nikola Antlová, Jakub Burget, Veronika Hradilová 2011
Arbitrability - definition • Consists of : Arbitr(ation) Ability = ability to be arbitrated - whether the jurisdiction requirements of arbitration ale fullfilled
Conditions of Arbitrability • 1) valid agreement of parties • 2) particular subject matter
Types of Arbitrability • 1) Procedural, Substantive • 2) Subjective : • agreement of parties Objective : • particular state´s law
Arbitrability - distinctions • Not sameconsideration • Differentfromstate to state • USA : • NY Convention • Broadermeaningofthis term • US courtshave had thepower to determineallquestionscontainingthearbitrability • the most importantissue : arbitrationclause
MITSUBISHI V. SOLER CHRYSLER-PLYMOUTH, 473 U. S. 614 (1985) Petitioner-cross-respondent:MitsubishiMotorsCorporation (Mitsubishi). Japanesecorporationwhichmanufacturesautomobilesand CISA, Swisscompanywhollyowned by Crysler Respondent-cross-petitioner:SolerChrysler-Plymouth, Inc. (Soler), is a PuertoRicocorporationwithitsprincipalplaceof business in Pueblo Viejo, Guaynabo, PuertoRico.
Agreenment On October 31, 1979, Solerenteredinto a Distributor Agreementwith CISA whichprovidedforthesale by SolerofMitsubishi-manufacturedvehicleswithin a designated area, including metropolitan San Juan. App. 18. On thesamedate, CISA, Soler, andMitsubishienteredinto a SalesProcedureAgreement (SalesAgreement) which, referring to the Distributor Agreement, providedforthedirectsaleofMitsubishiproducts to Solerandgovernedthetermsandconditionsof such sales
Paragraph VI oftheSalesAgreement: Arbitration Alldisputes, controversiesordifferenceswhichmayarisebetween [Mitsubishi] and [Soler] outofor in relation to Articles I-B through V ofthisAgreementorforthebreachthereof, shallbefinallysettled by arbitration in Japan in accordancewiththerulesandregulationsofthe Japan CommercialArbitrationAssociation
Dispute Soler run intoseriousdifficulties in meeting theexpectedsales volume i 1981 andrequestedthatMitsubishicancelseveralshipments. AboutthesametimeSolertryed to transshipandsalequantityofitsvehicles to US and Latin America. Mitsubishirefused to givepermissionfor such action
Claims MitshubishiheldSolerresponsibleforcancelingshipments, andthereforeforbreachofagreenment SolerallegedthatMitsubishiand CISA had conspired to dividemarkets in restraintoftrade. Refused to permitSoler to sellvehicles to US andSouthAmerica in order to replacethem on market
Whoshoulddecide? Solarsupporteditsclaims by (antitrust) Shermanact, thereforedemanded US court to decide Mitshubishidemandedarbitrationaccordingly to pragraph VI ofthesalesagreement
U.S. Supremecourtdecision AmericanSafetydoctrineshouldbeapplied to domestictransactions TheexpansionofAmerican business andindustrywillhardlybeencouragedifweinsistthatalldisputesmustberesolvedunderourlawsand in ourcourt
U.S. Supremecourtdecision Weconcludethatconcernsofinternationalcomity, respectforthecapacitiesofforeignandtransnationaltribunals, and sensitivity to theneedoftheinternationalcommercialsystemforpredictability in theresolutionofdisputesrequirethatweenforcetheparties' agreement, evenassumingthat a contraryresultwouldbeforthcoming in a domesticcontext.
EcoSwiss China Time Ltd. Vs. BenettonInternational NV, No. C- 126/97 (June 1, 1999) - Benetton (a Netherlandscompany) concluded a licensingagreementwithEcoSwissand Bulova the agreement contained an arbitration clause; arbitrators would apply Netherlands law Benettomterminatedthelicense 3 yrsearly → disputearose the arbitrators made two awards (a preliminaryone, then a final one) - theapplicationofBenettonforannulmentofthearbitrationawards (awardswerecontrary topublic policy?)
TheNetherlandsCodeof Civil Procedure: annulmentofthearbitrationawardifitiscontrary to public policy The Supreme Court of the Netherlandsreferedquestions to theCourtof Justice: theinterpretationofArticle 101 oftheTreaty ontheFunctioningoftheEuropean Union (ex Article 81 TEC): Article 101 oftheTreaty- a matterof public policy
Result: 1) non-applicationormisapplicationofArticle 101 maygiverise to the public policydefence in enforcementproceedings 2) domesticruleswhichrestrictpossibilityforannulmentbecauseit has becomeres judicataare justified by basic principlesofthenationaljudicialsystem → theprinciplesofres judicataprevailedovertheprincipleoftheprimacyof EU law
ECJ, summary: 1) „Where domestic rules of procedure require a national court to grant an application for annulment of an arbitration award where such an application is founded on failure to observe national rules of public policy, it must also grant such an application where it is founded on failure to comply with the prohibition laid down in Article 85 of the Treaty (now Article 81 EC). That provision constitutes a fundamental provision which is essential for the accomplishment of the tasks entrusted to the Community and, in particular, for the functioning of the internal market. Also, Community law requires that questions concerning the interpretation of the prohibition laid down in Article 85 should be open to examination by national courts when they are asked to determine the validity of an arbitration award and that it should be possible for those questions to be referred, if necessary, to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling.“
2)„Community law does not require a national court to refrain from applying domestic rules of procedure according to which an interim arbitration award which is in the nature of a final award and in respect of which no application for annulment has been made within the prescribed time-limit acquires the force of res judicata and may no longer be called in question by a subsequent arbitration award, even if this is necessary in order to examine, in proceedings for annulment of a subsequent arbitration award, whether an agreement which the interim award held to be valid in law is nevertheless void under Article 85 of the Treaty (now Article 81 EC), where the time-limit prescribed does not render excessively difficult or virtually impossible the exercise of rights conferred by Community law.“
Použitá literatura • MISTELIS,A.L., BREKOULAKIS,S.L. Arbitrability: InternationalandComparativePerspectives. KluwerLawInternational, 2009. 408s. ISBN 9789041127303 • FOUCHARD,P., GAILLARD,E., GOLDMAN,B. Internationalcommercialarbitration. KluwerLawInternational, 1999. 1280s. ISBN 9789041110251 • Internetová stránka dostupná na: http://www.gibsondunn.com/publications/Documents/Shore-DefiningArbitrability.pdf • Internetová stránka dostupná na: http://www.delawarelitigation.com/2010/10/articles/chancery-court-updates/procedural-arbitrability-compared-with-substantive-arbitrability-should-court-or-arbitrator-decide/ • Internetová stránka dostupná na: http://arbitration.uslegal.com/arbitration/arbitrability/ • Website:http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=473&invol=614
Internetová stránka dostupná na: http://ct.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.19960613_0000040.DCT.htm/qx Internetová stránka dostupná na: http://www.uchastings.edu/faculty-administration/faculty/armbruster/Eco%20Swiss%20Case.pdf Internetová stránka dostupná na: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:61997J0126:EN:HTML Internetová stránka dostupná na: http://www.wilmerhale.com/files/Publication/5c9f5f0d-c4dc-43c2-8fae-4dabb56c41cd/Presentation/PublicationAttachment/4e4e4bab-db82-4f71-8d1e-5089c9dd0748/Ratliff%202000_Part%201.pdf
Internetová stránka dostupná na: http://www.sjberwin.com/Contents/Publications/pdf/49/090606043516.pdf Internetová stránka dostupná na: http://books.google.cz/books?id=6we-5dIahwkC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false Internetová stránka dostupná na: http://books.google.cz/books?id=b1OgnDQ2UnwC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false