id: 20302

Polish Supreme Court ruling

dated 14 August 1923

Case No. Rw 2287/22

Summary by arbitraz.laszczuk.pl:

An arbitration award was issued against two parties, who both moved to set aside the award. The court of first instance found that one of the petitioners had not signed the arbitration clause, and because the two petitioners shared a common legal interest, the court set aside the award as against both of the petitioners. On appeal, the respondent alleged for the first time that the parties had expressly decided to draw up and sign a submission to arbitration before the arbitration court itself. The respondent moved to admit testimony to this effect by two of the arbitrators. The appellate court refused to admit the testimony and denied the appeal.

On review by the Supreme Court of Poland, the court held that the facts surrounding the conclusion of the arbitration clause had been sufficiently explored and thus there was no need to admit the testimony of the arbitrators on this issue. The refusal to admit such testimony did not invalidate the proceeding before the state court, particularly since the evidence was not offered before the court of first instance. The Supreme Court upheld the judgment by the appellate court accordingly.

Excerpt from the text of the court’s ruling:

Because it was found that the petitioner had not signed the arbitration clause, through placement of her signature or her mark, it was correctly ruled that the arbitration award issued on the basis of such clause was ineffective, and with respect to both petitioners; from the nature of the legal relationship which was to be determined by the arbitration award, there is an apparent uniformity of interest for both of the petitioners.