Procedural Order in Case 14079

Recourse to arbitration as the final forum after unsuccessful attempts to resolve a dispute by other means may, on occasion, lead to an allegation that earlier stages in the dispute resolution process have not been complied with. This was the case below, where the parties provided for a two-tiered dispute resolution process consisting of adjudication followed by arbitration. The question before the arbitral tribunal was whether the fact that counterclaims and set-off claims had not been submitted to adjudication before being submitted to arbitration rendered them inadmissible. It found no provisions in the parties’ contract allowing for exceptions to the adjudication phase, nor any evidence that the parties intended to waive the adjudication phase for counterclaims and set-off claims. As well as upholding the integrity of the two-tiered dispute resolution process, the arbitral tribunal issued recommendations on how to optimize the adjudication process.

Readers are reminded that a procedural order is a decision made by a particular arbitral tribunal in the exercise of its duties under the ICC Arbitration Rules in light of the circumstances of the case. Unlike awards, procedural orders are not subject to scrutiny by the ICC International Court of Arbitration.

For the purpose of publication, the procedural decisions reproduced here have been redacted so as to remove names of parties and other details not indispensable for their intelligibility. The decisions are reproduced in their original language. The footnotes form part of the original texts, unless otherwise stated, but have been renumbered in a continuous sequence.