Originally from World Arbitration And Mediation Review (WAMR)

Preview Page

I. INTRODUCTION
It is difficult to find any international arbitration award not
based on, or which does not at least mention, good faith. This
omnipresence of good faith does not mean (rather quite the
contrary) that it is clearly understood, that we know how it
should be used or that we are able to predict how an arbitral
tribunal may apply good faith in a particular case. Throughout
my experience in arbitration, I have been repeatedly faced with
the need to resolve claims based on good faith, and will cite three
proceedings by way of example.
At the beginning of my career, I was appointed chairman of an
arbitral tribunal, known today principally by the name of the
plaintiff: Norsolor. The case involved a commercial conflict
surrounding a sale and purchase agreement between a French
company and a Turkish company. The parties had submitted to
ICC arbitration without specifying either the place of arbitration
or the applicable law. The ICC Court decided that the place of the
arbitration would be Vienna and that the arbitral proceedings
would be conducted in accordance with Austrian procedural law.
Absent an express agreement between the parties, the arbitration
would be arbitration at law. When it came time to deliberate, the
tribunal was of the opinion that it could choose French or Turkish
substantive law. However, whether one law or the other was
applied, the arbitration would conclude in a diametrically
different manner. The tribunal upheld as a reasonable solution
the application of the general principles of international economic
law, invoking the lex mercatoria it believed to be in force between
international merchants. The party in disagreement petitioned
for annulment of the award in the Austrian courts on the basis