Polish Supreme Court ruling
dated 30 December 1926
Case No. I C 2009/24
Summary by arbitraz.laszczuk.pl:
In a dispute arising in the former Russian territory of Poland, the parties entered into a submission to arbitration containing a list of specific issues which the arbitrators were appointed to determine, followed by a general reference to any other disputes between the parties. The court of first instance and, on appeal, the Wilno Appellate Court refused to enforce the award on the grounds that the arbitration clause was too broad to be effective.
On cassation appeal, the Supreme Court of Poland found that the submission to arbitration of the specific list of issues referred to in the arbitration clause was valid, even though the additional general reference to any other disputes between the parties was too vague to effectively submit any other matters to arbitration. If the arbitration award was limited to matters specifically submitted to arbitration, the award could be enforced, but if it also covered other matters not specifically identified in the arbitration clause, the award would be subject to being set aside in whole or part. The appellate court had failed to make this determination, which was essential to the application for enforcement. Thus the Supreme Court vacated the decision of the appellate court and remanded the case for reconsideration.
Excerpts from the text of the court’s ruling:
1. A finding by the courts of two instances that an arbitration award is unenforceable is essentially a consequence of the judicially confirmed invalidity of the award, depriving it of force and effect.
2. The objective invalidity [of the arbitration award] could occur only if the scope of authority of the arbitration court was not specified at all or was extended generally, without closer description, to any and all disputes between the parties.