Return to site

49 court cases on arbitration agreement invalidness - unclear agreement (1)

June 21, 2023

Full title: 49 existing court cases on invalidness of arbitration agreement - If the arbitration agreement is unclear and the parties are unable to reach a consensus, the arbitration clause shall be invalid (1)

Case 1. If the parties only agree on arbitration and there is no agreement on an arbitration institution, a supplementary agreement may be reached. If an agreement cannot be reached, the arbitration agreement shall be invalid.

Case Name: Wuhan Jinxuan Can Municipal Engineering Co., Ltd. and Li Mouguo's Application for Confirmation of the Validity of the Arbitration Agreement

Case No.: (2019) E01 Minte No. 286

Reason for judgment: Article 8 of the Mechanical Equipment Leasing Contract signed on November 1, 2014 between the applicant Wuhan Jinxuancan Municipal Engineering Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Jinxuancan Company) and the respondent Li Mouguo agreed that "all disputes related to this contract shall be settled through friendly negotiation between Li Mouguo and Jinxuancan Company in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Contract Law of the China and other relevant laws. If no agreement can be reached through negotiation, they shall be submitted to the Arbitration Commission", There is no clear agreement on the arbitration commission. According to Article 18 of the Arbitration Law of the China, "if the arbitration agreement has no or unclear agreement on the arbitration matters or the arbitration commission, the parties can supplement the agreement, and if the agreement cannot be reached, the arbitration agreement is invalid", the arbitration clause involved in the Mechanical Equipment Lease Contract signed between the applicant Jin Xuancan and the respondent Li Mouguo is invalid.

Case 2. The arbitration clause in the case stipulates that the arbitration institution shall be the "arbitration commission at the place of contract signing", but if there are two or more arbitration commissions at the time of contract signing, it shall be deemed that the selection of the arbitration institution is not clear. If both parties have not reached a new agreement on the selection of the arbitration institution, the arbitration clause in the case shall be invalid.

Case Name: Shandong Shunde Concrete Industry Co., Ltd., China Railway Engineering Urban Construction Co., Ltd. and others applied for confirmation of the validity of the arbitration agreement

Case number: (2022) Lu 01 Min Te No. 53

Reason for adjudication: Article 16 of the Arbitration Law of the China stipulates that "an arbitration agreement includes the arbitration clauses concluded in the contract and the agreement reached in other written forms before or after the occurrence of the dispute to request arbitration. The arbitration agreement shall contain the following contents: (1) the expression of intention to request arbitration; (2) the arbitration matters; and (3) the selected arbitration commission." The arbitration institution selected for the arbitration clause in the case is the "Signing Place Arbitration Commission", which is the arbitration commission in the location of Jinan. However, at the time of signing the contract in question, the arbitration institutions in the location of Jinan were the Jinan Arbitration Commission and the Shandong Branch of the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission, and the selection of arbitration institutions was not clear. Due to the lack of a definitive arbitration institution for the arbitration clause in the case, and the failure of both parties to reach a new agreement on the choice of arbitration institution, the arbitration clause in the case is invalid.

Case 3. If the arbitration institution specified in the contract is the "arbitration institution in the employer's location", but there is no arbitration institution in the employer's location, and the parties cannot reach a supplementary agreement on the selection of the arbitration institution, the arbitration clause shall be invalid.

Case Name: Datang Environmental Industry Group Co., Ltd. Application for Confirmation of the Validity of Arbitration Agreement

Case No.: (2022) Jing 04 Min Te No. 229

Reason for decision: Article 18 of the Arbitration Law of the China stipulates that if the arbitration agreement does not stipulate or clearly stipulates the arbitration matters or the arbitration commission, the parties may supplement the agreement; If a supplementary agreement cannot be reached, the arbitration agreement shall be invalid. The arbitration institution stipulated in Article 24.2 of the Construction Contract for the Reclaimed Water Deep Treatment and Renovation EPC Project of North United Power Co., Ltd. Linhe Thermal Power Plant is the arbitration committee at the location of the employer. The employer Datang Environment Company is located in Haidian District, Beijing, and there is no permanent arbitration institution in Haidian District, Beijing that can accept contract disputes and other property rights disputes between citizens, legal persons, and other organizations with equal subjects, There are two arbitration institutions in Beijing that can accept the above-mentioned cases, namely the Beijing Arbitration Commission in Chaoyang District of Beijing and the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission in Xicheng District of Beijing. The arbitration clause in the "Construction Contract for the General Contracting Project of Reclaimed Water Deep Treatment and Renovation of Linhe Thermal Power Plant of Northern United Power Co., Ltd." does not clearly specify which arbitration institution to point to, and the parties cannot reach a supplementary agreement on this matter. Therefore, the arbitration clause in the "Construction Contract for the General Contracting Project of Deep Treatment and Renovation of Regenerated Water of North United Power Co., Ltd. Linhe Thermal Power Plant" is invalid.

Case 4. The arbitration agreement stipulates that the parties may apply to the local arbitration commission for arbitration, and based on the basic situation of the case, it can be determined as "local". However, if there are two or more arbitration institutions in the local area and both parties fail to reach a consensus on the selection of arbitration institutions, the arbitration agreement shall be invalid.

Case Name: Tianjin Feiyan Aircraft Manufacturing Co., Ltd. and Tianjin Lingang Haozhiying Property Services Co., Ltd. Applying for Confirmation of the Validity of the Arbitration Agreement

Case No.: (2020) Jin 02 Min Te No. 1

Reason for Judgment: The arbitration agreement involved in the case stipulates that arbitration can be applied to the "local arbitration commission". Considering that both parties are local enterprises and the contract project involved is also located in this city, it should be understood that both parties have agreed that the arbitration institution is the Tianjin Arbitration Commission. Considering that Tianjin has two or more arbitration institutions registered with the Tianjin Judicial Bureau, and both parties have not reached a consensus on the selection of arbitration institutions, in this case, The dispute arbitration agreement shall be deemed invalid.

Case 5. The arbitration agreement stipulates that the parties may bring an arbitration to the arbitration institution in the location of the project. If there is a dispute between the two parties regarding the location of the project, it is a situation stipulated by law where the parties are unclear about the agreement of the arbitration committee, and the arbitration agreement is invalid.

Case Name: Shandong Jiangjian Tiancheng Materials Co., Ltd. and Zibo Fusheng Building Materials Co., Ltd. Applying for Confirmation of the Validity of the Arbitration Agreement

Case number: (2020) Lu 03 Min Te No. 155

Reason for Judgment: The "Sales Contract for Aerated Concrete Blocks" signed between the applicant Shandong Jiangjian Tiancheng Materials Co., Ltd. and the respondent Zibo Fusheng Building Materials Co., Ltd. stipulates: "The resolution of contract disputes: Any disputes arising during the performance of this contract shall be resolved through mutual consultation between the parties. If consultation or mediation fails, arbitration shall be filed with the local arbitration institution in accordance with the law. The applicant claims to be located in Zibo and the respondent claims to be located in places such as Zibo and Jinan, as stipulated in the contract. There is a dispute between the two parties regarding the location of the project, which is a situation where the arbitration committee is not clearly agreed upon by both parties as stipulated by law. Therefore, the arbitration clause in question should be invalid.

Case 6. If the arbitration agreement stipulates that the arbitration institution shall be the arbitration commission of a certain city, and there are two or more arbitration institutions in that city, and the parties fail to reach an agreement on the selection of the arbitration institution, the arbitration clause shall be invalid.

Case Name: Applicant Jia Mouying and Respondent Shanxi Yitong Technology Co., Ltd. Applying for Confirmation of the Validity of the Arbitration Agreement

Case No.: (2020) Shaanxi 05 Minte No. 15

Reason for Adjudication: If the applicant and the respondent agree in the service contract for the face payment project involved in this case that any disputes arising during the performance of the contract cannot be resolved through negotiation, they shall be submitted to the Beijing Local Arbitration Commission for arbitration. Since there are more than two arbitration institutions in Beijing, in the event that the parties fail to reach an agreement on the choice of arbitration institutions, according to the provisions of Article 6 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Certain Issues Concerning the Application of the Arbitration Law of the China, the arbitration clause concerning dispute settlement agreed between the applicant and the respondent shall be deemed invalid.

Case 7. The contract stipulates that both parties may apply for arbitration to the arbitration committee in the place of operation, but if the specific arbitration committee agreement is not clear and specific, and the parties have not reached a supplementary agreement on the choice of arbitration institution, the arbitration clause shall be invalid.

Case Name: Xiamen Hulu Catering Management Co., Ltd. and Zhangzhou Vocational College of Technology Applying for Confirmation of the Validity of the Arbitration Agreement

Case No.: (2021) Min 06 Min Te No. 4

Reason for Judgment: The focus of the dispute in this case is whether the arbitration clause stipulated in the contract for the contracted operation of the First Canteen of Zhangzhou Vocational College of Technology is valid. Article 10 of the "Contract for the Contracted Operation of the First Canteen of Zhangzhou Vocational College of Technology" signed between Hulu Catering Company and the Institute of Technology stipulates: "If any dispute arises between the two parties during the performance of the contract, both parties shall negotiate and resolve it. If no agreement can be reached, either party may apply for arbitration to the arbitration committee of the place where the business is located. From the perspective of the contract agreement, if there is a dispute that cannot be resolved during the performance of the contract, both parties can apply for arbitration to the "Arbitration Committee of the Place of Business". However, the specific arbitration committee agreement is not clear and specific enough. The "Arbitration Committee of the Place of Business" can be understood literally as the Xiamen Arbitration Committee of the registered business location of Hulu Catering Company, It can also be the Zhangzhou Regional Arbitration Commission where the Institute of Technology is registered and operates. Although the Zhangzhou Arbitration Commission was not yet established when both parties signed the contract, the Zhangzhou Arbitration Commission was already established when Hulu Catering Company applied to confirm the effectiveness of the arbitration clause in this case. However, the two parties did not reach a supplementary agreement on whether to choose the Zhangzhou Arbitration Commission or the Xiamen Arbitration Commission to resolve the dispute. Therefore, the arbitration clause stipulated in Article 10 of the Contract for the Contracted Operation of the First Canteen of Zhangzhou Vocational College of Technology signed by both parties is invalid.