The case of Yemen Gas [2017] NSWSC 765 shows how important it is to clearly formulate the arbitration agreement to prevent the requirements set out in Section 7 of the Act from being met. The Bundesgerichtshof ruling confirms the long-standing approach of the Lower German courts to put an end to arbitration clauses. To be valid under German law, an arbitration agreement must be clearly linked to a particular legal relationship, such as. B an underlying contract or an existing dispute. It is not absolutely necessary to define the institution or the arbitral tribunal as long as it is clear of the arbitration agreement, its structure and the surrounding circumstances that the judicial proceedings of the state are excluded. Therefore, the requirements for fulfilling the s8 of the Law are as follows: as the case above indicates, the requirement to meet the criteria of a valid arbitration agreement should not be overlooked or underestimated. The key is to design the arbitration clause with specificity to ensure that arbitration is mandatory. Be aware of the process if it contains an alternative multi-level dispute resolution process. Instead, the Tribunal found that the preferred approach in Singapore was that the party requesting a stay of proceedings under the ILO`s S.

6, paragraph 2, had only to justify a prima facie case of the conclusion of the arbitration agreement. If there is a case of first investigation, the arbitration court is free to decide for itself. The applicant requested that the court have omitted the proceedings and, when the court refused to do so, the applicant commenced proceedings before the court to request a stay of the arbitration proceedings. The defendants then requested that the judicial process be interpreted pending the decision of the SIAC arbitration. Germany – FW Deutsches Schiedsrecht (Articles 1025 and following of the Code of Civil Procedure) applies to all arbitration proceedings if the place of arbitration is in Germany. The two essential requirements of an arbitration agreement are set out in Section 1029(1) of the ZPO: however, the Tribunal refused to adopt the English position in its entirety, since the English arbitration law is different from that of the ILO in many respects.