Read the scenario and answer BOTH questions.
(one page each)
Basic Ltd and Premium Ltd are two construction companies. They concluded a joint venture agreement which sets out their respective rights and obligations with respect to a construction project they are undertaking together for a client. The joint venture agreement contains the following clauses:
“11. DISPUTE SETTLEMENT Any dispute or difference concerning the construction of this Agreement or the rights or liabilities of either party hereunder shall be settled amicably. If the parties do not manage to settle, the dispute or difference may be adjudicated upon under the Rules of the London Court
- LANGUAGE AND LAW This Agreement is written in the English language and shall be interpreted according to the law of Uncitraland. The Courts of Uncitraland will have exclusive jurisdiction over it, to which jurisdiction the parties hereby submit.” Various disputes arose under the joint venture agreement. Each party wants to assert claims against the other. The parties’ respective managers held high-level settlement meetings.
They disagreed on everything, including the interpretation of clauses 11 and 12. Premium Ltd considers that they constitute a valid and binding agreement to arbitrate. Basic Ltd denies this and considers that they clearly provide for litigation. The parties agreed to let their lawyers fight it out.
- Imagine you are representing Basic Ltd. Prepare a short submission to Premium Ltd’s lawyers in which you advocate Basic Ltd’s position.
- Imagine you are representing Premium Ltd. Prepare a short submission to Basic Ltd’s lawyers in which you advocate Premium Ltd’s position. N.B. Uncitraland is a jurisdiction that adopted the UNCITRAL Model Law.
Be analytical and critical in your answer, making sure to always support your opinions with evidence from the sources you draw on and examples.