Final Award in ICC Case No. 18203
ICC Arbitration Tribunal
XLI Y.B. Comm. Arb. 276 (2016)
- Written by Abby Roughton, JD
Facts
Two companies from the United Arab Emirates (UAE) entered into a distribution agreement under which one company (the distributor) (defendant) was to act as the exclusive distributor of the other company’s (the manufacturer’s) (plaintiff) products in certain countries. The agreement provided for International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) arbitration of any disputes. The agreement also included a choice-of-law clause providing that the agreement “shall be governed by the laws as defined by the EEC (European Economic Community).” Although the EEC existed when the parties entered into the agreement, the EEC was incorporated into the European Union in 1993 and no longer existed when the parties’ dispute arose. During arbitration proceedings brought by the manufacturer against the distributor, the arbitrator had to decide which substantive law applied to the parties’ dispute. The manufacturer argued that the applicable law was the Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) and principles derived from the CISG, including the duty of good faith, principles of contractual liability by a breaching party, and a duty to fully compensate a nonbreaching party for harm. However, the UAE had not ratified the CISG.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning ()
What to do next…
Here's why 814,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.