Whether the defendant can invoke this clause as an arbitration agreement in circumstances in which it stated that no contractual relationship had been established. Consumer advocates have fought against the company`s practice by requiring consumers to sign arbitration agreements because consumers generally do not know they have waived their litigation rights and because arbitration decisions favour consumers by company (for more information on disputes that are routinely resolved through mediation , see also employee complaints: most disputes are resolved in arbitration proceedings or disputes?). As part of an investigation into 19,000 mandatory California arbitration proceedings, handled in 2003 by arbitrators appointed by the for-profit National Arbitration Forum (NAF), the nonprofit group Public Citizen found that companies won 94% of consumer lawsuits. The court had to analyze the terms of the contract to determine whether or not the dispute fell within the terms of the contract. The Tribunal found that the contract contained “a number of very unusual provisions and bears all the characteristics of a document agreed by the parties without legal consultation.” (b) An arbitration agreement may take the form of a compromise clause in a contract or in the form of a separate agreement (deposit agreement). The applicant, an oil operator, entered into an option contract with the defendant, a shipbuilder. The agreement gave the applicant three options, each for an order for four tankers. It provided that, in the event of an option exercised, delivery dates between the parties would be “agreed upon by mutual agreement,” but the defendant “will do its best to have a delivery” in 2016 for Option 1 and 2017 for The Two and Three Tankers. It also provided for the parties to enter into shipbuilding contracts within 10 days of the exercise of an option. The parties and their subsidiaries have also entered into other agreements, including four shipbuilding contracts that each order a tanker. The nature of this obligation showed that there was no binding agreement on conciliation, but merely an agreement that would attempt to resolve the matter through an arbitration procedure that had not been defined in the clause or elsewhere in the contract.
The absence of provisions regarding the number of arbitrators, the identity of arbitrators, the qualifications of the candidates for arbitration or the means used to select them also showed that the parties must reach additional agreement on this issue, since the reference to “Swiss arbitration” has neither the seat of arbitration nor the court that could make an appointment in place of the parties` agreement. , fixed.
