Originally from:
International Arbitration Court Decisions - 3rd Edition - Looseleaf
International Arbitration Court Decisions - 3rd Edition - Electronic
LATVIA
JUDGMENT BY THE RIGA REGIONAL
COURT RENDERED ON 19 AUGUST 2004
IN CASE CA-4208/20, 2004 (FORSCAN TIMBER
EXPORT AB v. INTERWOOD)
Subject Matters:
(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
Findings:
(1) The wording of the arbitration agreement and the notarized translations
of the arbitral award, the Rules of arbitration and the list of arbitral
institutions shall be taken in account.
(2) The parties’ agreement on the language for the arbitral proceedings had
not been observed as the arbitrator held the proceedings in the official
language of the state (Latvian), with the help provided by the interpreter,
in English.
(3) The writ of execution shall not be issued if the award was made in
violation of the provisions of the arbitration agreement and part D
(Arbitration) of the Civil Procedure Law as the dispute had been referred
to an arbitration court the parties had not agreed upon.
Parties:
Claimant: Swedish company “Forscan Timber Export” AB
Respondent: Latvian company “Interwood”
Place of court proceedings:
Riga, Latvia
Applicable law:
Latvian Civil Procedure Law
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
