The contract provided both that a dispute must to be referred to arbitration in London and also for any other dispute must be referred to arbitration in Moscow.
Held: The conflicting requirements for arbitration were so ambiguous as to be meaningless. There was no effective arbitration agreement.
Citations:
[1968] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 163
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – McNicholas Plc v AEI Cables Limited TCC 25-May-1999
The claimant had subcontracted to supply cabling on the defendant’s project. The contract provided both for the exclusive jurisdiction of the English courts but also for arbitration. The defendant applied for the action to be stayed and referred to . .
Cited – Sonatrach Petroleum Corporation (Bvi) v Ferrell International Ltd ComC 4-Oct-2001
. .
Cited – Frans Maas (Uk) Ltd v Samsung Electronics (Uk) Ltd ComC 30-Jun-2004
A large volume of mobile phones were stolen from a warehouse. The owner claimed damages from the bailee. The defendant said that standard terms applied limiting their responsibility to value calculated by weight.
Held: There was a bailment . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Arbitration
Updated: 20 April 2022; Ref: scu.238325
