Third parties who are outside an arbitration agreement but who are involved or allegedly responsible for the matters underlying the arbitration may significantly influence the course of the arbitration. Many arbitrations, if they were before the courts, would be multi-party cases. However, in arbitration, third parties may not be compelled to participate unless there is a drag provision in contracts between, for example, a contractor and a subcontractor. However, two cases show that third parties to an arbitration agreement may be compelled to provide evidence of discovery in certain circumstances and may be able to rely on an arbitration clause to expose related disputes. The intention of the parties plays a very important role in arbitration, and this can only be settled after a thorough reading of all the terms of the agreement. If the intention of the parties was to consolidate all disputes related to the project and refer them by mutual agreement to the same panel of arbitrators and resolve them by arbitration, the tribunal would take due account of them. [4] Under the WIPO Arbitration Rules, the parties may jointly select a sole arbitrator. If it opts for a three-member arbitral tribunal, each party shall appoint one of the arbitrators; these two persons then agree to the presiding arbitrator. Alternatively, the Center may propose potential arbitrators with relevant expertise or directly appoint members of the arbitral tribunal. The Center maintains a long list of arbitrators, ranging from experienced dispute resolution generalists to highly specialized practitioners and experts covering the entire legal and technical spectrum of intellectual property. This often involves the parties providing documents to the other parties and the court.
This includes documents on which they rely and documents they have asked the other parties to produce. This is often a point of contention between the parties. It is important to seek prompt legal advice on the intended extent of your obligations to ensure that you (a) can meet them and (b) manage the process as efficiently as possible. Macintosh J. held that, in certain circumstances, non-signatories may be parties to arbitration agreements. These circumstances include when the plaintiff treats the defendant as the true contracting party. Throughout the litigation, NWP asserted that defendants Yates and Tozman were the true parties. As a result, Macintosh J. stayed the trial in favour of arbitration.
In other words, outsiders to the arbitration agreement could rely on the arbitration clause to stay related disputes. If your arbitration is to be conducted in accordance with the rules of a particular arbitration institution, the rules of that institution generally prescribe what must be included in your notice of arbitration. As a general rule, the communication shall contain at least one description of the problem at issue. If the arbitration agreement provides that a party to the dispute must appoint an arbitrator, the notice must include the identity of the person the claimant wishes to choose. India`s approach by the courts to adopting the « corporate group » doctrine is indeed interesting and perhaps reflects pro-arbitration behaviour. However, this is another case in which the corporate veil is (not lifted). The tribunal first concluded that it had the power to decide whether IQVIA was bound by the dispute settlement clause of the cooperation agreement. Although the courts « generally leave the question of arbitrability … Arbitrators » where, as in this case, the arbitration agreement « expressly contains the AAA rules by reference » and « uses language that refers all disputes to arbitration, » the tribunal refused to refer the matter to the arbitrators because IQVIA was « not a signatory » to the cooperation agreement and, moreover, was not authorized to participate in the selection of arbitrators under this agreement.
[4] The Court noted that IQVIA`s obligation to refer the issue of arbitrability to an arbitration panel whose selection « played no role » would constitute an « untenable deprivation of IQVIA`s due process rights. » [5] The Court then considered whether IQVIA was bound by the arbitration clause of the cooperation agreement. The tribunal identified two exceptions to the general rule that IQVIA could still be compelled to submit to the agreement and participate in the arbitration: (1) the « direct benefit » theory and (2) the « participation » theory. [6] The Court considered these exceptions to be serious. By entering into an arbitration agreement, the parties agree to refer their dispute to a neutral court to decide on their rights and obligations. Although it is sometimes described as a form of alternative dispute resolution, arbitration is not the same as mediation or arbitration. A mediator or arbitrator can only recommend results, and the parties can choose whether or not to accept these recommendations. In contrast, an arbitral tribunal has the power to make decisions that are binding on the parties. In Northwestpharmacy.com Inc v. Yates, the Supreme Court of British Columbia has ruled that non-signatories can be parties to arbitration agreements. (2) The ICC Arbitration Rules provide for the application of an expedited procedure in cases of lesser value. If the parties wish to exclude the application of the provisions on expedited procedures, they must expressly object by adding the following wording to the above clause: The parties may also specify in the arbitration clause: other combinations of services are also possible. For example, arbitration can be used as a recourse to expertise or dispute resolution bodies.
Parties using ICC arbitration may also provide for recourse to the ICC International Centre for Alternative Dispute Resolution to obtain an expert`s proposal if an expert opinion is required during the arbitration. Second, the consent of both parties plays an important role in the relationship between the arbitration and the parties, whereas in the case of plurality, this is not the case. This is important given the need to respect the principle of party autonomy. Arbitration usually involves one or more hearings in which the parties` lawyers present arguments and question the other party`s witnesses and experts. First, by virtue of the premise of breach of confidentiality, rank higher in the case of the parties` adherence to the combination of arbitration and almost negligible in diversity. Accordingly, the tribunal did not grant IQVIA`s request to stay arbitration because it did not provide a basis on which IQVIA could be compelled to submit to the arbitration clause of the cooperation agreement. [14] The arbitration will then be conducted in accordance with the procedure adopted. The grounds on which an award may be challenged or challenged depend on factors such as the terms of the arbitration agreement, the « seat » of the arbitral tribunal and institutional rules.
A court`s findings of fact can rarely be challenged. However, if the court did not behave properly, did not answer questions that it should not have answered or, in some cases, erred in law, a party may apply to the court for the award to be set aside or refer it back to the court for its decision correctly. It can be argued that allowing the parties to accede could disrupt the dispute settlement mechanism negotiated by the parties and would resemble a recast of the treaty. In addition, in the face of imperfect arbitration clauses, arbitrators have the power to bind disputes between themselves, unless the parties themselves implicitly/expressly agree to serve as mediators. .