International Arbitration Court Decisions - 2nd Edition

Price: $225.00 1400 pages. 1 Hardcover Volume. Index. Published January 2008.
ISBN-13: 978-1-933833-08-8 / ISBN-10: 1-933833-08-4

A subscription/standing order is entered for each title you purchase, unless we are otherwise notified.

* Online Access at ArbitrationLaw Online: When you purchase and subscribe to this publication you will receive searchable access to it via our online collection of publications.

Book Overview

FOREWORD

AUSTRALIA
Sea Containers Ltd v. ICT Pty Ltd, judgment of the New South Wales Court of Appeal rendered in 2002 in case [2002]
NSWCA 84
Subject-matter:
Misconduct of arbitrators
Observations by Frank Bannon and Mathew Stulic

CANADA
SJO Catlin & Others Syndicate Nos. 1003 and 2003 Lloyd’s of London, et al. v. Jardin Lloyd Thomson Canada Inc. et al., Judgment of the Court of Appeal of Alberta Rendered on 18 January, 2006 in Case 2006 ABCA 18 (“The Jardine Case”)
Subject-Matter:
Whether the assistance that an arbitral tribunal may request from a court in taking evidence, pursuant to Article 27 of the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration, as implemented In Alberta, can include compelling the pre-hearing oral examination for discovery of third party witnesses
Observations by Henri Alvarez
Observations by Janet E. Mills

Dell Computer Corporation v. Union des consommateurs and Olivier Dumoulin, Judgment of The Court of Appeal of Québec Rendered on May 30, 2005 in Case [2005] R.J.Q. 1448 (On Appeal Before The Supreme Court of Canada)
Subject-Matter:
Whether an arbitration clause found in a consumer contract concluded on the Internet can affect the jurisdiction of Québec courts over a class action
Observations by Frédéric Bachand

Stefan Kanitz, Hugh Wallis, Richard Pearce, James Carnegie and John R. Wilson v. Rogers Cable Inc., judgment of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice rendered in 2002 in case [2002] O.J. No. 665
Subject-matters:
(1) Electronic commerce. Whether a contract might be amended – and an arbitration clause included – through the posting of a website notice
(2) Whether the arbitration agreement was invalid because it was unconscionable
Observations by Bradley J. Freedman and Edward C. Chiasson

CHINA
B company (People’s Republic of China) v. JV company (People’s Republic of China) and HK company (People’s Republic of China),Judgments on Jurisdiction by Beijing Second Intermediate People’s Court Rendered on 13 September 2001 and Beijing High People’s Court Rendered on 12 December 2001
Subject-Matter:
Jurisdiction—Whether a contract between a joint venture and one party to the joint venture, which has no arbitration clause, shall be subject to the arbitration clause of the joint venture contract
Observations by Liu Ping

Contestarshipping Company Limited of Cyprus (Cyprus) v. Sinotrans Guangdong Zhangjiang Company (P.R. China), Decision by the Guangzhou Maritime Court, P.R. China, rendered in 1998
Subject-Matters:
(1) Law applicable to decide properness of notice of the arbitration proceedings under Article V.1 b) of the New York Convention
(2) Authority to conclude the contract containing the arbitration clause (public policy)
(3) Party to the arbitral award to be recognized and enforced, English name of Chinese party
Observations by Liu Ping

DENMARK
KVM Industrimaskiner A/S (Denmark) v. Construction Action Vale Ltd (Canada), Maître J. (Chairman of the arbitral tribunal), Professor L (arbitrator), and Judge H (arbitrator) decision by the Danish Western Court of Appeal rendered on 27 JANUARY 2004 in case B-21717-00
Subject-Matters:
(1) Challenge of the amount of arbitrators’ fee fixed by the arbitrators in an international ad hoc arbitration
(2) VAT on arbitrators’ fees
Observations by Ole Spiermann

Republic of Latvia v. SwemBalt Aktiebolag, decision of the Maritime and Commercial Court, Copenhagen rendered in 2003 in case S-22-01
Subject-matters:
(1) Challenge of an arbitral award rendered under the Agreement between Sweden and Latvia on the Promotion and Reciprocal of Investments, SÄ 1992:93 (the “BIT”); question whether there was an investment in the meaning of the BIT
(2) Ne bis in idem where two requests for arbitration made
(3) Whether a Swedish court judgment declaring the award valid is also valid in Denmark pursuant to Article 26 of the European Court Convention
Observations by Christoph Liebscher

EGYPT
El Motahidah Company for Trade and Contracting (Egypt) V. The President of The Republic (Egypt), The Prime Minister (Egypt), The President of The Legislative Committee of The People’s Assembly (Egypt) and Shell Company for Marketing, Judgment of The Supreme Constitutional Court of Egypt Rendered on 9 May, 2004 in Case No. 15 of the JUDICIAL YEAR 24 (The “El Motahidah v. Shell Case”)
Subject-Matters:
(1) Whether the Egyptian Arbitration Law violates the constitutional principle that a party is entitled to litigate on two levels by giving the court of appeal exclusive jurisdiction over actions for setting aside arbitral awards
(2) Whether the Egyptian Arbitration Law violates the constitutional principle of equality by providing for disparate treatment of parties resorting to arbitration and those resorting to litigation
Observations by Dr. M.I.M. Aboul-Enein

ENGLAND
(HOUSE OF LORDS)
Lafarge Redlands Aggregates Ltd v. Shepard Hill Civil Engineering Ltd, judgment of the House of Lords rendered in 2000 in case [2002] 1 W.L.R. 1621
Subject-matters:
Multi-party arbitration. Whether a contractor can rely on tri-partite arbitration arrangements to avoid or delay arbitration with a sub-contractor
I.C.E. 5th Edition (June 1973) Standard form of Contract for Civil Engineering Works and the F.C.E.C. Standard Form of Sub-Contract (September 1984 Edition) (the “Blue Form”)
Observations by Stewart Shackleton

(COURT OF APPEAL)
Sun Life Assurance Co. of Canada (Canada) and American Phoenix Life and Reassurance Co. (USA) and Phoenix Home Life Mutual Insurance Co. (USA) v. The Lincoln National Life Insurance Co (USA), Judgment by the Supreme Court of Judicature Court of Appeal (Civil Division), England Rendered in 2004 in Case [2004] EWCA Civ. 1660
Subject-Matter:
Issue estoppel (estoppel by res judicata) created by an arbitral award in another arbitration between different parties in a related dispute
Observations by Salim A. H. Moollan

Approved Judgments by The High Court of Justice (1) Case No. [2003] EWHC 2602 (Comm) (2) Case No. [2002] Ewhc 121 (Comm), Introduction
(1) Approved Judgment By The High Court of JusticeQueens Bench Division Commercial Court, on 4 February 2004,In Case No. [2003] EWHC 2602 (Comm), Nisshin Shipping Co Ltd. v. Cleaves & Company Ltd. and Others
Subject-Matter:
Permit of a third party to access the arbitration agreement
(2) Approved Judgment By The High Court of Justice Queens Bench Division Commercial Court, on 4 February 2004, in Case No. [2002] EWHC 121 (Comm), Peterson Farms Inc. v. C & M Farming Limited

Subject-Matter:
Group of companies’ doctrine
Observations by Michael E Davis

Hussmann (Europe) Limited v. Ahmed Pharaon (formerly trading as Al Ameen Development and Trade Establishment, Judgment by The Supreme Court of Judicature Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Rendered on 4 March 2003 in Case [2003] Ewca Civ 266.
Subject-Matter:
Functus officio of an arbitral tribunal
Observations by Sarosh R. Zaiwalla

Capital Trust Investments Ltd v. Radio Design TJ AB and others, judgment of the Court of Appeal rendered in 2002 in case [2002] Civ 135
Subject-matters:
(1) Arbitration clause in an applicant form for the subscription of share
(2) Scope of the arbitration agreement
(3) Waiver under section 9(3) of the English Arbitration Act 1996
(4) Stay of court action under section 9(4) of the English Arbitration Act 1996
Observations by David St. John Sutton

Union Discount Company Ltd. v. 1. Robert Zoller & others, 2. Union Cal Ltd., judgment of the Court of Appeal rendered in 2001 in case [2001] EWCA Civ 1755
Subject-matter:
Costs incurred in foreign jurisdiction. A party was unable to recover costs in foreign proceedings. Whether party was entitled to recover foreign costs as damages for breach of exclusive jurisdiction clause in subsequent proceedings
Observations by Otto Sandrock
Observations by Jean-Louis Delvolvé
Observations by Claes Zettermarck

Veba Oil Supply & Trading GmbH v. Petrotrade Inc., judgment of the Court of Appeal (Civil Division) rendered in 2001 in case 1832.
Subject-matter:
When is an expert’s departure from instructions deemed to be material?
Observations by Doak Bishop and Richard Deutsch

1. AT&T Corporation, 2. Lucent Technologies Inc v. Saudi Cable Company, decision of the Court of Appeal (Civil Division) rendered in 2000 in case [2000] EWCA Civ 154 – the “Saudi Cable” case
Subject-matters:
(1) What constitutes bias on the part of an arbitrator?
(2) What constitutes misconduct on the part of an arbitrator?
(3) Whether an arbitral institution’s decision on a challenge of an arbitrator is final
(4) Whether the arbitrator should be removed and awards set aside on ground of bias
Observations by William K. Slate II
Observations by David P. Roney and Viviane Frossard
Observations by Stefano Azzali and Benedetta Coppo

FRANCE
(COUR DE CASSATION)
Louis Juliet, Benoît Juliet v. Paul Castagnet (arbitrator), Pierre Couilleaux (arbitrator) and Adolphe Biotteau (arbitrator), decision by the French Cour de Cassation, First Civil Chamber rendered on 6 December 2005 in case 1660 FS-P+B
Subject Matter:
Liability of arbitrators who have failed to render an award before the deadline for the arbitral proceedings
Observations by Louis Degos

State of Israel v. National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC), judgment of the French Cour de Cassation First Civil Chamber rendered on 1 February 2005 in case No. 01–13.742/02–15.237
Subject Matter:
Whether a French court can appoint an arbitrator on behalf of an obstructing party at the request of the other party in an arbitration that is not taking place in France or subject to French procedural law
Observations by Guillaume Tattevin
Observations by François-Xavier Train

(SUPREME COURT)
ABC International Bank PLC (France), The Inter-Arab Investment Guarantee Corporation (IAIGC) (Kuwait) v. BAII Recouvrement (France),decision by the French Supreme Court, First Civil Chamber rendered in 2004 in case 1231 FS-P
Subject Matter:
Whether French courts can order a company to pay interest as fromthe date of an international arbitral award, “post-award interest.”
Observations by Christopher R. Seppälä

(COURT OF APPEAL)
La Direction Générale de l’Aviation Civile de l’Emirat de Dubaï v. International Bechtel Company (Panama), decision by the Paris Court of Appeal on 29 September 2005 in Direction Générale de l’Aviation Civile de l’Emirat de Dubaï v. International Bechtel Co., LLP (The “DAC Dubai v. Bechtel” case)
Subject-Matter(s):
(1) Enforcement of an arbitral award set aside in the country of origin
(2) Law applicable to the effectiveness of an arbitral award
Observations by Philippe Pinsolle
Observations by Alexis Mourre

S.A. Thalès Air Defence v. G.I.E. Euromissile et al., decision by the Paris Court of Appeal rendered on 18 November 2004 in case No. 2002/60932
Subject-Matter:
Whether an arbitral award should be set aside on the ground that the award violated public policy consisting of C Competition Law (Art 81 of the EC Treaty) which should have been applied by the arbitral tribunal ex officio
Observations by Diederik de Groot

ABC International v. Diverseylever, judgment of the Paris Court of Appeal rendered in 2002 in cases 2001/10769 and 2001/15479
Subject-matter:
Characterisation of an arbitrator’s decision to dismiss a party’s application for interim payment – award or procedural order?
Observations by Charles Kaplan and Gilles Cuniberti

1. The Murmansk State Technical University 2. Association Brest 2000 v. 1. Compagnie NOGA d’Importation et d’Exportation 2. The Government of the Russian Federation 3. Fauveder SA, decision of the Brest County Court and the Paris Court of Appeals rendered in 2000 – the “Noga” case and the Seizure of the Sedov

The Seizure of Sedov
Subject-matter:
Whether the seizure pursuant to an SCC Institute Award of the Sedov, a Russian tall ship, by NOGA, a creditor of the Russian Federation, was contrary to international public law, French national law or international private law

The Noga case
Subject matter:
Whether the seizure, pursuant to an SCC Institute Award, of intangible property and property placed in a strongbox in the hands of the Banque Commerciale pour l’Europe du Nord-Eurobank to the detriment of the Embassy of the Russian Federation in France, the Permanent Delegation of the Russian Federation to UNESCO and the Commercial Representation of the Russian Federation in France, was valid
Observations by Emmanuel Gaillard

GERMANY
Parties not disclosed, judgment by the Federal Supreme Court of Germany rendered in 2004 in case II ZR 65/03
Subject-Matter:
Whether a dispute regarding the payment of the initial contribution to a limited liability corporation is arbitrable
Observations by Roman Jordans

X v. Y, decision of the Berlin Higher Regional Court (Kammergericht) rendered in 1999 in case 28 Sch 17/99
Subject-matter:
Construction of an arbitration agreement; Reference to a non-existing German arbitration institution
Observations by Jens Bredow

KAZAKHASTAN
ZAO International Airport Astana (Kazakhstan) v. Mabetex Project Engineering S.A. (Switzerland), judgment of the Judicial Collegium for Civil Cases of the Supreme Court of Kazakhstan rendered in 2004, Resolution No. 3A-121/2-04
Subject-Matter:
Requirements for a valid arbitration clause under the laws of Kazakhstan
Observations by M. K. Suleimenov

LATVIA
Swedish company “Forscan Timber Export” AB v. Latvian company “Interwood,” judgment by the Riga Regional Court, Civil Cases Board Rendered on 19 August 2004 in case: CA-4208/20.2004 (Forscan Timber Export AB v. Interwood)
Subject-Matter(s):
(1) Determination of the jurisdiction in case of similar names of arbitral institutions
(2) Arbitrator’s knowledge of the language agreed in the arbitration agreement
(3) Competence – competence
(4) Issuance of the writ of execution
Observations by Ziedonis Ūdris and Inga Kačevska

NETHERLANDS
Marketing Displays International Inc. (USA) v. VR Van Raalte Reclame B.V. (the Netherlands), judgments rendered by the District Court of The Hague on 27 May 2004 in (1) case KG/RK 2002-979 and 2003-1617 and by the Court of Appeal of the Hague on 24 March 2005 in (2) case 04/694 and 04/695 (Marketing Displays International Inc. v. VR Van Raalte Reclame B.V.)
Subject-Matter(s):
(1) Leave for enforcement under the New York Convention
(2) Art. 81 EC
(3) (International) public policy
Observations by Diederik de Groot

NORWAY
X v. Y, decision of the Hågoland Court of Appeal, 16 August 1999
Subject-matter:
Enforcement of an arbitration agreement entered into through exchange of e-mails
Observations by Gunnar Nerdrum

RUSSIA
(COMMERCIAL COURT)
The Consortium Kodest Engineering (Italy) v. Limited Liability Company “Most Group” (Russia), judgment of the Presidium of the Higher Commercial Court of the Russian Federation rendered on 22 February 2005 in case 14548/04 “The Kodest Case”
Subject-Matter(s):
(1) Whether the burden of proof with respect to the New York Convention Article V(1)(b) is on the defendant or the claimant.
(2) Whether the defendant was given proper notice of the arbitration proceedings
Observations by Dominic Pellew

Pressindustria S.p.A. v. Tobolsk Petrochemical Combine, Judgment of the Federal Commercial Court of the Western Siberian Okrug rendered in 1999 in case F04/1402-291/A70-99 and judgment of the Presidium of the Higher Commercial Court rendered in 2003 in case 2853/00
Subject-matters:
(1) Dissolution of a joint venture – the relevance of mandatory rules according to Russian law
(2) Whether the arbitral tribunal went beyond the scope of the arbitration clause
Observations by Dominic Pellew

SINGAPORE
Luzon Hydro Corp. (Philippines) v. Transfield Philippines Inc. (Philippines), judgment of the Singapore High Court rendered in 2004 in case [2004] 4 SLR 705; [2004] SGHC 204
Subject-Matter:
Whether the expert had gone beyond his mandate and the agreement of the parties and whether not providing the parties with the information supplied by the expert to the arbitral tribunal was a breach of natural justice in making the award
Observations by Devashish Krishan

SPAIN
Kern Electrónica SA v. Goldstar Company Limited, judgment of the Supreme Court rendered in 2001 – the “Kern” cases
Subject-matters:
(1) Whether an arbitration clause is not binding since the parities’ choice of law did not have any connection with the contract or the dispute
(2) Whether an arbitration clause is null and void because it does not include an explicit will of the parties to comply with the award
Observations by Juan Fernández-Armesto
Observations by José Rosell

SWEDEN
Bankruptcy Estate of Svenska Kreditförsäkringsaktiebolaget (Sweden) v. Unione Italiana di Riassicurazione S.p.A, et al,decision by The Stockholm District Court rendered in 2001 in Case K3-4897-92 and decision by The Svea Court of Appeal rendered in 2001 in Case Ä 5337-01 and decision by The Swedish Supreme Court rendered in 2003 in Case Ä 3504-01
Subject-Matter:
Applicability of an arbitration clause in bankruptcy proceedings
Observations by Christer Söderlund

JSC Novokuznetsk Aluminium Plant (Russia) v. Base Metal Trading S.A. (Switzerland), decision by the Stockholm District Court rendered in 2004 in case Ä 860-04 & Decision by the Svea Court of Appeal rendered in 2004 in case ÄÄ 4247-04
Subject-Matter:
Finality of a determination by an arbitration institution regarding a challenge of an arbitrator’s impartiality
Observations by Robin Oldenstam

(SUPREME COURT)
The Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce v. Office of the Prosecutor-General of Sweden, decision by the Supreme Court of Sweden rendered on 16 June 2004 in case Ä 853-03
Subject-Matter:
Whether, by virtue of criminal investigations in Russia, documents contained in a case file at the Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce should be handed over to Russian authorities pursuant to the European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters of 1959
Observations by Annette Magnusson

A.I. Trade Finance Inc. and Bulgarian Foreign Trade Bank v. GiroCredit Bank Aktiengesellschaft der Sparkassen, judgment of the Supreme Court rendered in 2000 in case N T 1881-99 – the “Bulbank” case
Subject-matter:
Confidentiality in international arbitration in Sweden
Observations by M.I.M. Aboul-Enein
Observations by Gerald Aksen
Observations by Gregory Reid and Lucy Greenwood

MS Emja Braack Schiffahrts KG v. Wärtsilä Diesel AB, decision of the Supreme Court, 15 October 1997 – the “Emja” case
Subject-matter:
Assignment of an arbitration agreement
Esselte AB v. Swedish State Pension Fund, including the First, the Second and the Third Board of Directors (the AP-Fund), decision of the Supreme Court, 3 April 1998
Subject-matter:
Whether claims which partly were claimed in an earlier arbitration proceedings by way of set-off should be regarded res judicata in a second arbitration proceedings. The claims were dismissed in the first arbitration proceedings
Observations by Stewart Boyd
Observations by Joachim Kuckenburg

Skandinaviska Färginstitutet v. Birgitte Hartmann and her company Institut für Farbe, decision of the Supreme Court rendered in 2000 in case T 12-99 – the “IFA” case
Subject-matters:
The right to introduce set-off claims in an arbitration
Observations by Gustaf Möller

3S Swedish Special Supplier AB v. Sky Park AB, judgment of the Supreme Court rendered in 2000 in case T 5119-99 –
the “3S” case
Subject-matters:
Recourse against a party which has not complied with a request for advance payment of the arbitration tribunal’s costs.
Observations by Jingzhou Tao, Anne-Laure Vincent Michael Polkinghorne

(COURT OF APPEAL)
The Titan Corporation (USA) v. Alcatel CIT SA (France), decision by the Svea Court of Appeal in Sweden rendered in 2005 in case No. T 1038–05
Subject-Matter:
When is an award deemed to have been rendered in Sweden?
Observations by Patricia Shaughnessy
Observations by Christer Söderlund

Republic of Kazakhstan v. MTR Metals Ltd. (Cyprus), I. Partial Award on Jurisdiction & Final Award rendered in 2001 in SCC case 85/2000 & MTR Metals Ltd. (Cyprus) v. Republic of Kazakhstan, II. Decision by the Svea Court of Appeal rendered on 25 May 2004 in case T 1361-01
I. Subject-Matter(s):
(1) Jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal; whether the agreement to arbitrate can be concluded from parties conduct before a state court
(2) State immunity as a bar to arbitration?
(3) Issue of succession of parties
II. Subject-Matters:
(1) Jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal
(2) Possible bias of the arbitral tribunal
(3) One arbitrator excluded from the deliberations?
Observations by Kendall Moholitny
Observations by Ola Åhman

Dirland Télécom S.A. (France) v. Viking Telecom AB (Sweden), decision by the Court of Appeal for Western Sweden rendered on 29 December 2003 in case T 4366-02
Subject-Matter:
Non-compliance with mandatory European telecommunications
Law – does it constitute a violation of Swedish ordre public ?
Observations by Diederik de Groot

The Czech Republic v. CME Czech Republic B.V., judgment by the Svea Court of Appeal, Stockholm, rendered in 2003 in case T 8735-01 – the “CME v. Czech Republic” case
Subject-matters:
(1) Whether an arbitrator was excluded from the deliberations
(2) Whether the tribunal failed to take into consideration applicable law
(3) Whether the tribunal lacked jurisdiction due to lis pendens and res judicata
(4) Whether the tribunal exceeded its mandate – the concept of joint tortfeasors
(5) Whether the tribunal exceeded its mandate – decision concerning determination of the damage
(6) Whether the tribunal exceeded its mandate – previous investors and prior breaches
(7) Whether the judgment of the Court of Appeal may be appealed
Observations by Noah Rubins
Observations by Stanisław Sołtysiński and Marcin Olechowski
Observations by Hans Bagner
Observations by Tore Wiwen-Nilsson

SwemBalt Aktiebolag v. Republic of Latvia, decision of the Svea Court of Appeal, Stockholm, rendered in 2002 in case Ä 7192-01
Subject-matters:
(1) Enforcement of an award rendered under the Agreement between Sweden and Latvia on the Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investments (SÄ 1992:93) (“the BIT”); question whether the re was an investment in the meaning of the BIT
(2) Should enforcement be refused on the ground that the arbitral tribunal lacked jurisdiction for reasons of lis pendens?
Observations by Christoph Liebscher

1. The A Company, 2. The B Company v. The Former Soviet Republic, jurisdictional Award rendered in 1998 in SCC cases 38/1997 and 39/1997 & Judgment of the Stockholm District Court rendered in 2001 in cases T 1510-99 & Judgment of the Svea Court of Appeal, Stockholm, rendered in 2002 in case T 4496-01 - The “Government Guarantee” case 1089
Subject-matters:
(1) Application, under Swedish law, of an arbitration clause laid down in a business contract, to a third party guarantor
(2) Applicable law. Whether a choice of “governing law” in a supply contract is applicable when determining whether a guarantor is bound by an arbitration clause in the supply contract
(3) Is state sovereign immunity a bar to arbitration?
Observations by Hans Smit

American Pacific Corporation v. Sydsvensk Produktutveckling AB in bankruptcy, and Mr. Jan Andersson, decision of the Svea Court of Appeal, Stockholm, rendered in 2001 in case Ä 4859-00
Subject-matters:
(1) Recognition and enforcement of a foreign arbitral award
(2) Allocation of costs as between the parties in the enforcement proceedings
Observations by Lars Edlund

Planavergne S.A. v. Kalle Bergander i Stockholm AB, decision by the Svea Court of Appeal, Stockholm, rendered in 2001 in case Ä 4645-99
Subject-matters:
(1) Recognition and enforcement of a foreign arbitral award; law applicable to the legal form of the arbitration agreement
(2) Enforcement of a declaratory judgment regarding the costs of the arbitration
Observations by Lars Edlund

Rolf Gustafsson v. Länsförsäkringar Bergslagen-Wasa ömsesidigt, judgment by the Svea Court of Appeal, Stockholm, rendered in 2000 in case 8090-99.
Subject-matter:
Whether an award was based on matters not submitted by the parties to the arbitrators
Observations by Martin Wallin

Transnational Company Kazchrom v. 1. AIOC Resources AG, in liquidation 2. Mr Edward Moran, judgment of the Svea Court of Appeal, Stockholm, rendered in 2000 in case T 6902-99 – the “Kazchrom” case
Subject-matters:
(1) Universal succession under Kazakh law
(2) Validity of an arbitration agreement following a universal succession
(3) Service of a request for arbitration and procedural documents, with a Kazakh company
Observations by Aigoul Kenjebayeva

The Government of the Russian Federation v. Compagnie NOGA d’Importation et d’Exportation S.A, judgment of the Svea Court of Appeal, Stockholm, rendered in 1998 in case 925-98-80 – the “Noga” case
Subject-matter:
Whether a second arbitral award covered a question already decided with res judicata effect in a first award; application of Article 31(2) of the Rules of the Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (1988)
Observations by Patrik Schöldström

Fagep v. V/O Stankoimport, decision of the Svea Court of Appeal, Stockholm, 23 December 1997
Subject-matters:
(1) An arbitral award is not void pursuant to section 20, 1st subs. of the Swedish Arbitration Act 1929 (no valid arbitration agreement)
(2) An arbitral award is not void pursuant to section 20, 2nd subs. of the Act, (absence of arbitrator’s signature on the award)
(3) The award should not be set aside pursuant to section 21, 1st subs., point 1 of the Act (award given after the expiration of the period laid down)
(4) A party was considered as having waived an irregularity of the proceedings according to section 21, 2nd subs. of the Act
Observations by Gustaf Möller

(DISTRICT COURT)
Judgments by The Stockholm District Court rendered In 2003 In (1) Case T 7898-00 And (2) Case T 3697-01, Introduction Open Joint Stock Company “Yukos Oil Company” (Moscow, Russian Federation) v. Petro Alliance Services Company Ltd (Houston, Texas, USA), (1) Judgment By The Stockholm District Court, rendered In 25 April 2003, In Case T 7898-00
Subject-Matter:
Whether parties can dispose of the validity of the arbitral award

MÍR Müteahhitlik ve Ticaret A.S. (Ankara, Turkey) v. The Commercial Bank MOST-Bank (Moscow, Russia), (2) Default Judgment By The Stockholm District Court, rendered In 12 October 2003, In Case T 3697-01
Subject-Matter:
Setting aside of an arbitral award for alleged procedural irregularity and excess of arbitral authority according to the 1929 Swedish Arbitration Act through default judgment
Observations By Carita Wallgren and Gisela Knuts

Mr. A and others v. Mr. B, decision of the Stockholm District Court rendered in 2001 in case Ä 7197-01
Subject-matter:
Appointment of arbitrator. Application of Section 14 of the Swedish Arbitration Act (1999). Doctrine of joinder of necessary parties
Observations by Georgios Petrochilos

SWITZERLAND
(SUPREME COURT)
Undisclosed Parties, decision by the Swiss Supreme Court rendered on 6 October 2004 in case 4P117–2004
Subject-Matter:
Admissibility of appeals filed against partial awards stricto sensu
Observations by Pierre-Yves Gunter

KK Ltd. (Turks and Caicos Islands v. FF (Paris, France), judgment of the Swiss Supreme Court rendered in 2003 in case 4p.137/2002
Subject-Matters:
(1) Swiss courts’ powers to review foreign law
(2) French law on representation of companies
(3) Security for costs before Swiss courts
Observations by Laurent Hirsch

X v. Y, judgment of the Supreme Court rendered in 2002 in case 4P.226/2001
Subject-matters:
(1) Request to set aside an arbitral award on the ground that one co-arbitrator failed to attend the deliberation (Swiss PILS –LDIP, Art 190, para 2, lit.a)
(2) Request to set aside an arbitral award on the ground that the parties were not treated equally and a party was refused the opportunity to be heard (PILS, Art. 190, para 2, lit.d)
(3) Alleged violation of public order on the ground that the arbitrators had failed to examine a violation of Greek and European competition law (PILS, Art. 190, para 2, lit.e)
Observations by Konstantin Razumov

(COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE)
Air (PTY) Ltd. v. International Air Transport Association (IATA) and C. SA, Decision by the Geneva Court of First Instance Rendered on 2 May 2005 in Case C/1043/2005-15SP
Subject-Matter:
Anti-arbitration injunction
Observations by Matthias Scherer and Teresa Giovannini

Judgments by the Swiss Supreme Court rendered 4 February 2005 in case 4P.236/2004 and II. 7 September 2006 in case 4P.114/2006
I. Subject Matter:
(1) Exclusion of annulment action in arbitration clause
II. Subject Matters:
(1) Exclusion of annulment action in Bilateral Investment Treaty
(2) Scope of jurisdiction of an arbitral tribunal

USA
Professional Realty and Development Corporation (USA) v. Sloan Electric (USA), judgment of the Appellate Court of Illinois, Third District, rendered in 2004 in case no. 3–03–0563
Subject-Matter:
Gross error of law and manifest disregard of law as grounds to set aside arbitral awards in the United States
Observations by Grant Hanessian
Observations by Ihsan Dogramaci

1. Stephen B. Sawtelle, 2. Hackett Associates, Inc. v. 1. Waddell & Reed, Inc., 2. Torchmark Corporation, judgment of the Supreme Court New York County Appellate Division rendered in 2003 in case 754 N.Y.S. 2D 264
Subject-matter:
Punitive damages in arbitral award
Observations by Steven C Bennett

INDEX

Book Overview