Sentences with phrase «parties to the arbitration agreement for»

However, the working group found a consensus that «the risk of multiple proceedings or conflicting decisions should not outweigh the risk that parties wishing to avoid their commitment to arbitrate, or to delay or disrupt arbitral proceedings, might commence an action which includes claims that are both within and without the scope of the arbitration agreement or unnecessarily names persons who are not parties to the arbitration agreement for tactical reasons.»

Not exact matches

The parties agree that any and all controversies, disputes or claims arising out of or under this Agreement, shall be exclusively governed and decided by binding arbitration under the Federal Arbitration Act in conformity with the Rules and Procedures as established by the American Arbitration Association, and the determination of the arbitrator shall be final and binding (except to the extent there exist grounds for vacation of an award under applicable arbitration statutes).

In the event of any controversy, claim or dispute between the parties arising out of or relating to this agreement or the breach, termination, enforcement, interpretation, consionability or validity thereof, including any determination of the scope or applicability of this agreement to arbitrate, shall be determined by arbitration in Laramie County, Wyoming or in the county in which the consumer resides, in accordance with the Laws of the State of Wyoming for agreements to be made in and to be performed in Wyoming.

Given that this Agreement provides for mandatory mediation and arbitration, if any party commences litigation in violation of this provision, such party shall reimburse the other parties to the litigation for the costs and expenses, including attorneys» fees, incurred in seeking to abate such litigation and compel arbitration.

For instance, in a 1968 case, a Swiss court refused to issue an enforcement order on the grounds that the arbitral tribunal had not complied with the agreement of the parties that «all disputes should be settled in one and the same arbitral proceedings» and instead conducted the arbitration in two stages.904 In a 2001 case, the Italian Supreme Court enforced a first award but not a second award made with respect to the same dispute.

One commentator has suggested that a failure to comply with the parties» agreement should not constitute a ground for refusal under article V (1)(d), where such failure is justified by the obligation to comply with the mandatory rules of the place of the arbitration.871 Other authors have argued that it should be assumed that the parties» intention was to be bound by an agreement that is valid at the place of arbitration, and that the reference to «agreement of the parties» must therefore be understood within the limits of the mandatory rules of the forum.872

A court that rules on an application for recognition and enforcement in reference to the procedural law of the country where the arbitration took place, without first ascertaining the existence of a party agreement, will thus violate the Convention.868

As one United States court observed, «[u] nder the New York Convention, we examine whether the award exceeds the scope of the [arbitration agreement], not whether the award exceeds the scope of the parties» pleadings».803 This interpretation of article V (1)(c) which distinguishes the parties» pleadings or prayers for relief from the «submission to arbitration» referred to in article V (1)(c), is consistent with a narrow interpretation of the grounds for refusal to recognize or enforce an award.

133 (1) Despite the grievance and arbitration provisions in a collective agreement or deemed to be included in a collective agreement under section 48, a party to a collective agreement between an employer or employers» organization and a trade union or council of trade unions may refer a grievance concerning the interpretation, application, administration or alleged violation of the agreement, including any question as to whether a matter is arbitrable, to the Board for final and binding determination.

Summary: The appellant alleged that a binding arbitration agreement did not exist between the parties and that the case should therefore be remanded to the district court for decision.

Of course, parties take that risk if they include such wording in their agreements and it is possible, although perhaps unlikely, for the parties to agree to exclude the operation of the general guidelines in their arbitration.

Although the parties executed the document, which was entitled «civil mediation agreement,» plaintiffs» counsel wrote to the retired judge to point out that although the document «refer [red] to this proceeding as a «mediation,»» plaintiffs «believe [d] that it is properly an arbitration proceeding for which you will be asked to render an award.»

However, parties can still refer any dispute to ICSID (or another arbitration institution) if it is provided for in the applicable BIT or arbitration agreement, and ICSID awards are immune from challenge by local courts.

277.41 A collective agreement between a board and a designated bargaining agent for a teachers» bargaining unit may provide for the final and binding settlement by arbitration, without stoppage of work, of all differences between the parties arising from the interpretation, application, administration or alleged violation of this Part or any regulation, guideline, rule or policy under it, including any question as to whether a matter is arbitrable.

Mandatory arbitration in an agreement can effectively rob you of the right to present your case in a court if the agreement states that the arbiter's decision is binding for both parties.

The Arbitration Act itself specifically provides that Courts are not to interfere in disputes covered by an arbitration agreement other than for the limited purposes of assisting in the conduct of arbitrations, ensuring that they are conducted in accordance with arbitration clauses, to prevent unequal or unfair treatment of parties to arbitration clauses, and to enforce arbitration awards.

For example, if a party commences court proceedings in England & Wales in breach of an arbitration agreement with the defendant, the defendant may apply to the court for a mandatory stay of those proceedings in favour of arbitration pursuant to s 9 of the Arbitration Act 19For example, if a party commences court proceedings in England & Wales in breach of an arbitration agreement with the defendant, the defendant may apply to the court for a mandatory stay of those proceedings in favour of arbitration pursuant to s 9 of the Arbitration Act 19for a mandatory stay of those proceedings in favour of arbitration pursuant to s 9 of the Arbitration Act 1996.

The proponents of this position say that if the parties want the safety net of appeal protection, they could provide in the arbitration agreement for an appeal to another arbitral tribunal.

Moreover, the waiver of immunity contended for was an implied waiver, said to arise from the arbitration agreement itself where it was agreed that the Award was to be «binding on the parties» and included a provision that the parties undertook «to carry out any Award without delay and should be deemed to have waived their right to any form or recourse insofar as such waiver can validly be made».

The response to the notice of arbitration may also include: (a) Any plea that an arbitral tribunal to be constituted under these Rules lacks jurisdiction; (b) A proposal for the appointment of a sole arbitrator referred to in article 8, paragraph 1; (c) Notification of the designation of an arbitrator referred to in articles 9 or 10; (d) A brief description of counterclaims or claims for the purpose of a set - off, if any, including where relevant, an indication of the amounts involved, and the relief or remedy sought; (e) A notice of arbitration in accordance with article 3 in case the respondent formulates a claim against a party to the arbitration agreement other than the claimant.

An umbrella arbitration agreement (i.e an overarching agreement that provides arbitration rules for disputes arising out of subordinate agreements) may be useful where there are various contracts with different parties that are likely to give rise to related disputes.

Arbitration agreements are generally claimed to be used to simplify the resolution of claims for both parties, but arbitration tends to favor defendants over plaintiffs.

For arbitration cases where mediation might be useful, the parties can employ what is called «blended mediation / arbitration,» in which the third - party neutral acts initially as the mediator to see if the parties can reach an agreement on many disputes and then acts as the arbitrator, deciding the disputes the parties can not agree upon.

The Public Enterprises Law no. 6/2012 of 8 February restrains the arbitration agreement in contracts entered into by public enterprises, by setting out that «it is up to the judicial courts to undertake the trial of all disputes in which a public company is a party thereof, including measures to enforce civil liability for acts of...

According to the Polish arbitration law (based on the UNCITRAL Model Law), an arbitration agreement does not deprive the parties of the right to apply to a Polish court for interim relief.

When a contract between the parties states that the JW Commercial Arbitration Rules will be used to resolve disputes between the parties, or a contract provides for disputes to be resolved through arbitration by JW without specifying the rules to be utilized, or a contract does not state how disputes will be resolved and the parties agree to modify their agreement to provide for arbitration by JW, or two or more parties without a written contract between them agree to submit their dispute for resolution through arbitration by JW, then these Rules, with any written modifications agreed to by the parties and approved by the arbitrator, will apply.

Woodsford Litigation Funding and Leste Litigation Finance announce a global cooperation agreement to serve the growing Brazil and Latin America market for third party funding of international arbitration and litigation

The court will only grant leave if it finds four conditions to be satisfied: (a) the determination of the question will substantially affect the rights of one or more of the parties; (b) the question is one which the tribunal was asked to determine; (c) the decision of the tribunal was obviously wrong, or the question is one of general public importance and at least open to serious doubt; and (d) despite the agreement of the parties to resolve the matter by arbitration, it is just and proper in all of the circumstances for the court to determine the question.

For instance, a clause might not be considered an arbitration agreement under the 1996 Act if it does not permit the arbitrator to make decisions that are binding on the parties (Turville Heath Inc v Chartis Insurance UK Ltd [2012] EWHC 3019 (TCC)-RRB-.

The court is also entitled to stay court proceedings under its inherent jurisdiction where the requirements of section 9 of the 1996 Act are not satisfied — for instance, where there is a dispute whether the parties have entered into a binding arbitration agreement or whether the dispute falls within the scope of the arbitration agreement (see A v B [2006] EWHC 2006 (Comm)-RRB-.

Under section 72 of the 1996 Act, a party who takes no part in the arbitral proceedings can apply to the court for a declaration or injunction restraining arbitration proceedings by challenging: (i) the validity of an arbitration agreement; (ii) whether the arbitral tribunal has been properly constituted; or (iii) the matters that have been referred to arbitration.

Insight All too often, parties to arbitration make agreements that leave the decisions on most of their options to others or to chance, warns Daniel Pascucci for Mintz Levin..

By way of example only (and not by limitation), if the parties do not agree on whether a particular Dispute is subject to arbitration under this arbitration agreement, the proper tribunal to decide such Dispute is the United States District Court (for the appropriate district, as provided above) or, absent subject matter jurisdiction in that United States District Court, in the appropriate state court (as described above).

In response to this, the ULCC previously added wording enumerating the specific purposes for which a court could intervene: to assist the arbitration process, to ensure the arbitration is in accordance with the parties» agreement, to prevent unfair or unequal treatment or to enforce awards.

Application for enforcement of the arbitral award should be submitted to a competent judge along with a copy of the arbitration agreement, original award and certified translation of the award if the award is rendered in English, unless the parties agree on alternative means of enforcement of the judgment.

Parties entering into commercial agreements with foreign state - owned entities frequently insist that their agreements provide for disputes to be resolved through binding arbitration rather...

(The agreement contained an arbitration clause but allowed the parties to approach the court for urgent injunctive relief).

In an effort to stop the bleeding, the Conservative Government passed back - to - work legislation that provided for set wage increases and mandatory interest arbitration to impose a new collective agreement — with an arbitrator appointed by the Federal Government (unless the parties settled).

A typical example of a «narrow» arbitration agreement might be found in a buy - sell agreement that calls for the buyout of a manager's stock in a closely held company upon death at fair market value as of the date of death as determined by mutual agreement with an arbitrator chosen by some specified method determining the fair market vale as of the relevant date if the parties fail to reach a mutual agreement within X days.

If the contract calls for arbitration, but allows that parties «to seek any other remedies available under law or equity» is that a broad or narrow arbitration agreement?

It was based on his reasonable conclusions that (i) the parties» agreement provided for mediation as a precondition to arbitration; (ii) the requirement to mediate «in Delaware», which ran afoul of section 10 of the Arthur Wishart (Franchise Disclosure) Act, could be severed from the parties» agreement using the «blue pencil» approach, which kept intact the requirement to mediate, just not in Delaware; and (iii) applying the «appropriate means» branch of the discoverability test in s. 5 (1)(a)(iv) of the Limitations Act, 2002, the two year limitation period for arbitration commenced on the date that mediation was deemed completed.

Except as set forth below concerning arbitration, any claims or actions regarding or arising out of this Agreement must be brought exclusively in a court of competent jurisdiction sitting in Nashville, Tennessee, and each party to this Agreement submits to the jurisdiction of such courts for the purposes of all legal actions and proceedings arising out of or relating to this Agreement.

If the parties can not reach an agreement, the parties can explore other options for settlement such as mediation, arbitration, private judging and neutral case evaluation, some of which may allow them to stay within the collaborative framework.

This method described in Part Eleven of this Manual may also be utilized for the conduct of arbitration between Board Members of different Boards of different states, subject to the parties» voluntary agreement in advance to accept the place, date, and time established for a hearing by the arbitration panel chosen in accordance with prescribed procedures, and to pay all costs of such arbitration as may be directed by the panel, and further subject to applicable state law of the respective states regarding binding arbitration.