Source: http://www.inhouselawyer.co.uk/wgd_question/what-are-the-validity-requirements-for-an-arbitration-agreement-under-the-laws-of-your-country-4/
Timestamp: 2019-11-17 17:32:24
Document Index: 662062180

Matched Legal Cases: ['Art. 1650', '§ 598', '§ 871', '§ 600', 'Art. 7', 'Art. 1454', 'Art. 1461', 'Art. 1', 'Art. 5', 'Art. 7']

What are the validity requirements for an arbitration agreement under the laws of your country? | The In-House Lawyer
Under Argentine law, the arbitration agreement shall be “in writing” (Art. 1650 NCCC). While a written agreement signed by the parties would be sufficient to prove the existence of an “arbitration agreement”, the writing requirement can also be fulfilled by an exchange of letters respectively executed by each party.
Law 101/1987 stipulates that an arbitration clause which is an integral part of a contract shall be regarded as an agreement separate from the other terms of the contract. Notwithstanding the above, an arbitral tribunal’s decision which declares the contract void from the outset shall not automatically give rise to the nullity of the arbitration clause.
The special requirements for an arbitration agreement are that it must be in writing and there must be an explicit undertaking to transfer the dispute resolution to the arbitrator. Arbitration agreements may also be concluded by electronic means of communication. The scope of the disputes to be resolved in the arbitration proceedings must be specified (i.e. it is impossible to include all potential future disputes in an arbitration agreement).
Furthermore, as the arbitration agreement is a contract, it must meet the general requirements for contracts and legal acts under Czech law. Among other things, the arbitration arrangements must be definite and comprehensible.
The Matter in dispute must be Capable of ‘Conciliation’
The matter to be arbitrated must be capable of ‘conciliation’ (Article 4(2)) and, therefore, cannot relate to matters of a criminal nature.
‘contained in a document signed by the Parties or mentioned in an exchange of letters or other means of written communication or made by an electronic communication…’ (Article 7(2)(a))
This requirement for a written agreement, is further satisfied where the arbitration agreement makes a clear reference to ‘a Model Contract, international agreement or any other document containing an arbitral clause’ which will form part of the contract (Article 7(2)(b)).
‘an exchange of written statements between the Parties during the arbitration proceedings or upon acknowledgement before the Court, where one party requests that the dispute be referred for Arbitration and no objection is made by the other party in the course of his defence’. (Article 7(2)(d))
The above denotes an offer and unconditional acceptance of an arbitration agreement.
This is, however, subject to the issuer of such pleadings having the authority to bind the represented party to arbitration, whether by an exchange of pleadings or otherwise.
To fall within the scope of the 1996 Act, an arbitration agreement must be in writing or be evidenced in writing. This includes an oral agreement to arbitrate by reference to “terms which are in writing” (s.5(3) of the 1996 Act).
Under the Arbitration Law, an arbitration agreement can be entered into by the parties before or after a dispute arises. The Arbitration Law requires the agreement to be entered into in writing (or be part of a main agreement), although the law also allows for a pre-dispute arbitration agreement to be evidenced by an exchange of letters, telexes, telegrams, facsimiles, email or other communication method as long as the receipt of that communication is acknowledged by the other party and recorded.
Any post-dispute arbitration agreement must be in writing.
The general requirements for agreements under Indonesia’s contractual law also apply to arbitral agreements, namely: mutual consent, the parties’ capacity, a definite object, and a permissible cause.
The content and scope of an arbitration agreement are governed by § 598 of the Liechtenstein CCP. Pursuant to this provision, an arbitration agreement is an agreement between parties to submit any or all disputes which have arisen or will arise between them that relate to a contractual or non-contractual relationship between them to arbitration. The arbitration agreement may be concluded by way or a separate agreement or in the form of a clause forming part of a main agreement.
Arbitration agreements may be challenged under the general rules (§ 871 et seq. ABGB) on the grounds of error, fraudulent intent or duress. Furthermore, the valid conclusion of arbitration agreements is subject to formal requirements (§ 600 CCP).
According to article 1423 of the Commerce Code, an arbitration agreement must be in writing and signed by the parties, or it may be in an exchange of letters, telexes, telegrams or faxes, or any other means of telecommunication that properly record the agreement.
As well, the arbitration agreement can be valid if there it exists a written complaint and a written answer to it where such inference cannot be denied. Also, a reference made in an agreement to a document that contains a committing clause to arbitrate will constitute an agreement to arbitrate if such agreement is in writing and the reference creates the implication that such clause is part of the agreement.
For these agreements it is strongly recommended to define the arbitral mechanism and institution that shall know about the arbitral procedure, since it is not advisable to use Ad Hoc mechanisms.
Arbitration agreements may comprise current and potential disputes under a defined legal relationship between the parties. Only disputes at the disposal of the parties may be subject to arbitration. In addition, the ordinary rules and principles of formation and validity under Norwegian contract law apply to arbitration agreements.
There is no particular form prescribed; agreements need not be executed in writing. However, they may be declared void if they are entered into under duress, fraud or undue influence, or if the agreement is deemed unreasonable pursuant to Section 36 of the Contract Act.
There are some additional validity requirements, including requirements to written forms, that apply to arbitration agreements in special cases (eg, in relation to carriage of goods and consumer disputes).
The validity requirements in relation to consumers are that:
agreements entered into before a dispute has arisen are not binding on the consumer; and
The arbitration agreement must be in writing. An arbitration agreement shall be deemed written if it is included in a document issued by the two parties or in an exchange of documented correspondence, or any other electronic or written means of communication.
Moreover, a stipulation in a contract to be bound by an arbitration clause in any other document shall constitute an arbitration agreement. Similarly, a stipulation in a contract to be bound by the provisions of a model contract, international convention or any other document containing an arbitration clause shall constitute a written arbitration agreement, if the reference clearly deems the clause as part of the contract.
An arbitration agreement must be concluded by persons having legal capacity, whether they be natural persons (or representatives) or corporate persons. In general, government bodies may not agree to enter into arbitration agreements except upon the approval of the Chairman of the Council of Ministers, unless allowed by a special provision of law.
Art. 7(2) of the UNCITRAL Model Law provides that ‘[t]he arbitration agreement shall be in writing’ and ‘[a]n agreement is in writing if it is contained in a document signed by the parties or in an exchange of letters, telex, telegrams or other means of telecommunication which provide a record of the agreement, or in an exchange of statements of claim and defence in which the existence of an agreement is alleged by one party and not denied by another’. Singapore law also provides in the same section that ‘[t]he reference in a contract to a document containing an arbitration clause constitutes an arbitration agreement provided that the contract is in writing and the reference is such as to make that clause part of the contract’.
Korea’s Arbitration Act (the “Act”) defines arbitration agreement as “agreement between the parties to settle, by arbitration, all or some disputes which have already occurred or might occur in the future with regard to defined legal relationships, whether contractual or not” (Article 3(2) of the Act). According to a 2007 ruling by the Korean Supreme Court, it is not required that an arbitration agreement stipulate the arbitral institution, governing law, or seat for the agreement to be valid.
The Act requires that an arbitration agreement must either be in writing (Article 8(2) of the Act) or be deemed to have been made in writing (Articles 8(3), 8(4) of the Act). An arbitration agreement is deemed to have been made in writing where (i) the terms of the arbitration agreement have been recorded, regardless of how the agreement was made (including by oral means); (ii) the terms of the arbitration agreement have been communicated by electronics means (e.g., telegram, telex, facsimile, electronic mail) and the terms are verifiable; (iii) no opposing party disputes allegations in a request for arbitration or answer that an arbitration agreement exists; or (iv) a contract refers to a document containing an arbitration clause which forms part of the contract. These requirements are consistent with Option I under Article 7 of the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration, as amended in 2006.
According to the EAL, an arbitration agreement may be concluded prior to the existence of the dispute or after it has arisen. Whether being an arbitration clause (clause compromissoire) or a submission agreement (compromise), the validity requirements of an arbitration agreement under the arbitration law are the following:
-	the parties must have capacity to enter into the arbitration agreement (article 11);
-	the subject matter of the arbitration must be arbitrable (article 11);
-	the subject of the dispute to be resolved by arbitration must be specified in the compromise, or in the statement of claim in case of a prior agreement to arbitrate (article 10); and
-	the arbitration agreement must be in writing or else it is null. The writing requirement includes a document signed by the parties, an agreement by exchange of correspondences or other means of communication (article 12), and/or an incorporation into the contract by reference to a document containing an arbitration agreement insofar as the reference is explicit in considering the arbitration agreement part of the parties’ contract (article 10(3)).
Furthermore, it is worth noting that in administrative contracts, the arbitration agreement must be approved by the competent minister, or whoever assumes his or her authority with respect to public entities, and delegation in this regard is prohibited (article 1). This has been confirmed by a judgment of the State Council where it ruled that the arbitration agreement is void when the competent minister, or whoever assumes his or her authority with respect to public entities, has not approved it and that such requirement is a matter of public policy. It also ruled that the arbitration agreement must deal only with matters that are arbitrable and in the case of a submission agreement (compromis d’arbitrage), the parties must identify the dispute subjected to the arbitral proceedings or the agreement would be null and void. (State Council, challenge no. 8256 of JY 56, hearing session dated 5 March 2016)
As a general comment, arbitration agreements are considered as contracts (Art. 1454 Civil Code), so that they must comply with the general requirements of contracts (consent, legal capacity, lawful purpose and cause) (Art. 1461 Civil Code)
Specifically, according to Art. 1 of the LAM the first validity requirement of the arbitration agreement is that all controversies must be subject to transaction. The second requirement is that the arbitration agreement must be in writing (Art. 5) and it can be understood that an arbitration agreement exists not only if it is in a writing document signed by the parties, but when it is the result of an exchange of letters or any other writing communication means that record the will of the parties to submit themselves to arbitration (Art. 7), which could include emails or other writing document, even if they are not signed by the parties.
According to Article 7(2) of ICA Act the arbitration agreement must be in writing. Nevertheless, the same provision states that the ‘in-writing’ requirement is also fulfilled when (i) the agreement to arbitrate can be found in any exchange of communication among the parties, (ii) in an exchange of statements of claim and defence one party alleges the existence of an arbitration agreement and the other party does not deny it, (iii) when a written contract refers to a document containing an arbitration agreement provided that such reference implies that this arbitration agreement is part of the referring contract.
An arbitration agreement may be no longer enforceable according to Chilean contract law because of nullity, resolution by breach of contract, or termination –either by mutual agreement or by expiration date or condition. By virtue of the separability principle, the circumstances affecting the enforceability of the underlying contract do not affect the enforceability of the arbitration agreement unless the specific ground is able to contaminate any contractual arrangement like legal incapacity when signing the contract.
A valid arbitration agreement in international arbitration must meet minimum requirements of form and substance. In terms of formal requirements, the arbitration agreement must be made in writing, by telegram, telex, facsimile or any other means of communication allowing it to be evidenced by text. Strictly speaking, signature or exchange of the arbitration agreement is not required as long as the parties' agreement can otherwise be evidenced based on written documents. The revised chapter 12 of the PILA is expected to provide for a relaxation of these formal requirements, allowing for an arbitration agreement to be validly concluded even if only one party fulfils the aforementioned formal requirements.
As regards content requirements, such arbitration agreement must stipulate the parties' intent to resolve a determined or determinable dispute by way of arbitration, thereby excluding the jurisdiction of the state courts.
According to the AL, a valid arbitration agreement shall meet the following conditions: (Articles 1 and 2)
The arbitration agreement shall be in writing, but an arbitration agreement may be deemed to exist if it can be sufficiently discerned from the communications between the parties in the form of documents, security, letters, fax, telegram or other methods.
The parties may stipulate to resolve through arbitration only disputes to which settlement is allowed under law.
The arbitration agreement must be related to the particular legal relationship existing between the parties. An arbitration agreement has effect on the parties if it is stipulated for disputes arising from such particular legal relationship.
As regards international commercial arbitral proceedings having their seat in Greece, articles 7 para. 3 and 5 L. 2735/1999 incorporate verbatim the provisions of article 7 para. 2 of the Model Law. Hence, both the written form requirement as well as the exchange of letters requirement are preserved. The latter casts doubt on the validity of the conclusion of an arbitration agreement by means of an oral or tacit acceptance of a respective offer made in writing. At the same time though, article 7 L. 2735/1999 introduces three provisions unknown to the Model Law seeking to ease the written form requirement or the consequences of its absence: (a) In para. 4 it is provided that the form requirement shall be deemed to have been fulfilled in case an arbitration agreement concluded orally is recorded in a document transmitted from one party to the other party or by a third party to both parties, assuming that no objection was made in good time, and that the contents of such documents may be deemed to consist part of the contract with common usage. This provision is similar to Section 1031 (2) of the German Code of Civil Procedure, (b) In para. 6 it is provided that the issuance of a bill of lading making explicit reference to an arbitration clause in a charter party constitutes a valid arbitration agreement. This provision is similar to the former Section 1031 (4) of the German Code of Civil Procedure, (c) In para. 7 it is provided that the lack of written requirement is remedied in case the parties participate in the arbitration proceedings without raising any objection – reservation as to it. This provision is a reproduction of the provision of article 869 para. 1 of the GrCCP controlling domestic arbitration. It is obviously similar to the provision of the Model Law (also incorporated in article 7 para. 3 of Law 2735) that an arbitration is in writing in case it is contained in an exchange of statements of claim and defence in which the existence of an agreement is alleged by one party and not denied by another.
In relation to domestic arbitration, article 869 para. 1 of the GrCCP adopts also both the written form requirement as well as the exchange of documents requirement. It should be noted that said provision explicitly demands with regard to the exchange of documents (letters, facsimiles etc.) that each of them be signed by the parties. Said provisions of Law 2735/1999 and of Model Law relaxing the written form requirement are unknown to the GrCCP. It is provided though, as mentioned before, in said article, that in case the parties participate in the proceedings without making any reservation or objection the lack of written form requirement is remedied.