NOT A PARTY, NOT A PROBLEM: THE DILEMMA OF EXTENDING ARBITRATION CLAUSE TO NON-SIGNATORY STATES
Keywords:
state, state-owned enterprises, alter ego, state attribution, Pyramids case, Zeevi Holdings v. The Republic of Bulgaria and The Privatization Agency of The Republic of Bulgaria, agency theory, intervention of stateAbstract
This article will explore the case law regarding the extension of the arbitration clause to non-signatories, in particular, to states via the prism of state enterprises in international commercial arbitration cases. In this paper, the author will also discuss the legal grounds and doctrinal theories utilized in commercial arbitration cases for reaching decisions on extending the arbitration clause to the non-signatory state, and it will try to argue about the caveats and pitfalls that coexist in such disputes. Furthermore, specific cases along with their solutions, such as the Pyramids case and Zeevi Holdings, are presented in order to elaborate on the given concept, namely arbitration and its role on a global scale.
References
1. Rau A.S. Arbitral Jurisdiction and the Dimensions of “Consent”. 24 ARB. INT’L, 2008.
2. Townsend J.M. Non-Signatories in International Arbitration: An American Perspective. 13 ICCA Congress Series, Montréal, June 2006. PCA, The Hague, 2007.
3. Hanotiau B. Complex Arbitrations (2005). William W. Park, Jurisdiction to Determine Jurisdiction, 13 ICCA CONGRESS SERIES, Montréal, June 2006. PCA, The Hague, 2007.
4. Born G.B. International Commercial Arbitration. 2nd ed., 2014.
5. Lew J.D.M., Mistelis L.A., Kröll S.M. Comparative International Commercial Arbitration. 2003.
6. Paulsson J. The Idea of Arbitration. 2001.
7. Gaillard E., Savage J. Fouchard Gaillard Goldman on International Commercial Arbitration. 1999.
8. Park W.W. Arbitration of International Business Disputes: Studies in Law and Practice. 2012.
9. Van den Berg A.J. The New York Convention of 1958: Towards a Uniform Judicial Interpretation. 1981.
10. Rogers C.A. Arbitration’s Jurisprudential Foundations. American Journal of International Law, 2008, vol. 102, iss. 1, pp. 61–91.
11. Fouchard Gaillard Goldman on International Commercial Arbitration 290 and following. Eds.
E. Gaillard, J. Savage. 1999.
12. Yergin D., Stanislaw J. The Commanding Heights. Touchstone, New York, 1998, p. xii.
13. Paulsson J. Arbitration without Privity. ICSID Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal, 1995,
vol. 10, p. 232.
14. ICC Case No. 3493, IX Y.B. COM. ARB. 111 (1984); 112 J. DROIT INT’L (CLUNET) 130, 1985; note Goldman, 1986 REV. ARB. 75.
15. 114 J. DROIT INT’L (CLUNET) 638, 1987, note Berthold Goldman; 1987 REV. ARB. 469, note Philippe Leboulanger; X Y.B. COM. ARB. 113, 1985.
16. UNCITRAL Arbitration, Final award, 2006, Oct. 25.
