SCC Case 24/2002 - Chapter 5 - SCC Arbitral Awards: 2004-2009
Mary O'Connor, Partner in the International Arbitration and Dispute Resolution Group of Kilpatrick Stockton LLP, London.
John Gatenby, Solicitor Advocate, Registered Mediator and Partner, Addleshaw Goddard LLP, Manchester
Originally from SCC Arbitral Awards 2004-2009
V. SCC CASE 24/2002
(1) The potential res judicata effect of the SCC Institute's dismissal of Respondent's counterclaim, after the counterclaim had been raised as part of an initial reply to the SCC Institute, but before the referral of the case to the Sole Arbitrator.
(2) The proper law of the arbitration agreement, where the parties expressly chose to apply English law to the substantive contract, but did not make an express choice of law in respect of the arbitration agreement, and the seat of the arbitration proceedings was Sweden.
(3) Whether the requirement of "mutual consultations" in the arbitration agreement was a condition precedent to the jurisdiction of the Arbitrator, or a contractual provision to be considered as part of the substantive arbitration proceedings, and whether the condition had been satisfied.
Observations by Mary O'Connor
Observations by John Gatenby & Kate Menin