Click to view:
Stockholm Arbitration Report (SAR) - (Individual Back Volumes)
Stockholm Arbitration Report (SAR) - (Individual Back Issue)
Preview Page SAR 2001 - 2
(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
(1) A rule laid down for the protection of creditors in the Civil Code of
the Republic of Kazakhstan (“RK Civil Code”), could not be invoked
by a debtor claiming that a proper transfer had not taken place due to
failure to respect such rule.
(2) A universal successor is bound by an arbitration agreement entered
into by the company being taken over, prior to the succession.
(3) Service of the request for arbitration by a private attorney-at-law with
the vice president of the Kazakh company through a visit to the
company is a valid notification of the commencement of the
arbitration. Service of further documents with the company’s reception
personnel was considered valid notification.
Claimant: Transnational Company Kazchrom (“Kazchrom”)
Respondents: 1. AIOC Resources AG, in liquidation (“AIOC”)
2. Mr Edward Moran (“Moran”) (USA)
Place of court proceedings:
The Swedish Arbitration Act of 1929
Excerpts below follow an unofficial translation of the proceedings in the
Stockholm District Court and the Svea Court of Appeals.