SCC Case 21/1999 - Chapter 12 - SCC Arbitral Awards - 1999-2003

About the Editors:
Sigvard Jarvin has been involved in more than 215 international arbitrations under the arbitration rules of the ICC, the Stockholm Arbitration Institute, the Dutch Arbitration Institute, the American Arbitration Association, LCIA, UNCITRAL, the Cairo Regional Centre, and other arbitration organizations. He was general counsel to the ICC International Court of Arbitration, Paris (1982-1987) and member of the Court (1988-1995). He also chaired the ICC working party revising the ICC/CMI Maritime Arbitration Rules (1997-1998).

Mr. Jarvin was the rapporteur at the 1990 and 1998 ICCA Congresses and was chairman of the foreign section of the Swedish Bar from 1999 to 2000, and he is also a member of the board of the Institute of Arbitration Law at Stockholm University and a member of the ICC Commission on Arbitration and the International Arbitration Club, London. He is cited yearly as one of the best arbitration lawyers in France in Chambers Global — The World’s Leading Lawyers , published by Chambers & Partners.

Annette Magnusson, is a Professional Support Lawyer at the firm of Mannheimer Swartling, Stockholm. She was formerly Assistant Secretary General and legal counsel for the Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce.

Observation Commentary by:

M.I.M. Aboul-Enein, Director, Cairo Regional Centre for International Commercial Arbitration.

PDF115.9 KB

$40.00

Description:

Originally from SCC Arbitral Awards 1999-2003

Preview Page

Procedural matters:

(1) Claimants’ legal capacity and proper representation; whether a consortium is a party.
(2) Whether the arbitral tribunal has jurisdiction to consider the case on its merits when, in accordance with the arbitration clause, adjudication shall precede arbitration.

Findings:
(1) The Consortium is not a party [Claimant] in this arbitration, and G [third party] is not a party. Claimant 1 and Claimant 2 have been parties from the outset and remain properly represented and shall be recognised as Claimants.
(2) The absence of valid adjudication decides the fate of this arbitration, irrespective of any compliance or lack of compliance with any other aspects of the agreed procedure. The processing and progress of claims under the contracts through a properly appointed adjudicator is an essential feature of the dispute resolution procedure. The arbitral tribunal dismisses Claimants’ request for arbitration, without prejudice to Claimants’ right to bring any action before an arbitral tribunal or otherwise, in accordance with the dispute resolution procedure contained in the contracts, or otherwise.

Parties: Claimant 1 (Spain) Claimant 2 (Spain)
Third party involved: G (Russian Federation)
Respondent (Russian Federation)

Table of Contents:

XII. SCC case 21/1999

Subject-matters:

(1) Claimants’ legal capacity and proper representation; whether a consortium is a party.

(2) Whether the arbitral tribunal has jurisdiction to consider the case
on its merits when, in accordance with the arbitration clause, adjudication
shall precede arbitration.

Observations by M.I.M. Aboul-Enein