case law

id : 20303

id: 20303

Polish Supreme Court judgment

dated 5 May 1926

Case No. Rw 398/26

Summary by arbitraz.laszczuk.pl:

The parties concluded an arbitration agreement in 1924 in Przemyśl providing for appointment of two arbitrators, who would then select a third, presiding arbitrator. However, if one of the party-appointed arbitrators, after accepting appointment, refused to participate in the proceeding or refused to sign the award, the parties submitted the dispute for resolution by the remaining party-appointed arbitrator and the presiding arbitrator.

In the ensuing arbitration, the two party-appointed arbitrators, Aszer M. and Eisig F., selected Samuel B. as the third, presiding arbitrator. Aszer M. subsequently resigned from the panel, and the award was issued and signed by Eisig F. and Samuel B. The court of first instance upheld the award, but the appellate court held that the award was ineffective because Aszer M. did not sign the award.

On review by the Supreme Court of Poland, the court held that the arbitration clause was valid, as it met the requirement of the code for appointment of “one or more arbitrators.” The court found that under the arbitration clause, when Aszer M. resigned from the panel he ceased to be a member of the legally appointed arbitration court, and thus his signature was not required in order for the award to be valid.

Excerpt from the text of the court’s ruling:

There is no provision in the code prohibiting the parties from including a provision in a valid arbitration clause that if one of the arbitrators refuses to take part in the proceeding or sign the award, the other remaining arbitrator or arbitrators together with the presiding arbitrator shall constitute the complete arbitration court appointed in accordance with § 577 of the [former Austrian] Civil Procedure Code.

scroll up