Elektrim SA v. Vivendi Universal SA
England and Wales High Court of Justice, Queen’s Bench Division
[2007] EWHC 571 (2007)
- Written by Mary Katherine Cunningham, JD
Facts
In 1995, Elektrim SA (Elektrim) (plaintiff) also founded a joint venture, Polska Telefonia Cyfrowa Sp. z.o.o. (PTC), with several other companies. In 1999, Elektrim and Vivendi Universal SA (Vivendi) (defendant) entered a joint venture to establish a company, Telco. The joint-venture contract contained an arbitration agreement, and when a dispute arose over the transfer of PTC shares to Telco, arbitration and litigation arose in Polish and other courts. In August 2003, Vivendi entered a request for London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA) arbitration seated in London under English substantive law. In the LCIA arbitration, Vivendi sought monetary damages and other relief against Elektrim. However, after a failed attempt at settlement, Vivendi also commenced arbitration in April 2006 before the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) in Geneva with Swiss substantive law controlling the arbitration. After the initiation of the ICC arbitration, Elektrim wrote to the LCIA, seeking a stay of proceedings during the ICC arbitration proceeding. The LCIA tribunal rejected Elektrim’s application for a stay. Elektrim filed a motion in English courts seeking an injunction to restrain Vivendi and the other companies from continuing arbitration before the LCIA. Elektrim argued that the injunction should continue until the final determination of an ICC arbitration, which was currently under way in Geneva. Elektrim argued the arbitration was vexatious and onerous to Elektrim, requiring an injunction to protect its legal and equitable rights.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Aikens, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,000 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

