International Commercial Dispute Resolution
Re-sit Exam 2019-2020
April 6, 2020, 9.00 – 12.00
, Question 1
TaxiFleet Inc., a corporation duly established in Delaware (U.S.), provides services to clients exclusively in
New York. The corporation employs 120 taxi drivers who are insured under a contract between TaxiFleet
Inc. and NYInsurance Inc.
Following ‘way too many accidents as a consequence of negligent attitudes of taxi drivers, resulting in an
unacceptable increase of insurance compensation claims’ (quote: NYInsurance Inc.) a conflict arises
between TaxiFleet Inc. and NYInsurance Inc.
Before even discussing the substance of the dispute, the conflicting parties disagree on how to
adjudicate the dispute: in arbitration proceedings or in court? NYInsurance Inc. adamantly sticks to the
view there is agreement on arbitration, as the insurance policy clearly provides for the following:
‘Any dispute between NYInsurance Inc. and the insured will be submitted to arbitration under the
auspices of the NYIAC (New York International Arbitration Center)’
TaxiFleetInc., however, while acknowledging this document as being ‘one out of many’, observes that it
was never signed. The only document signed was a so called ‘framework insurance contract’, the final
provision referring to ‘implementation documents’ separately dispatched to ‘the insured’.
(a) Discuss the respective positions of the parties with respect to the existence of mutual
consent on the resolving disputes through arbitration. (4 points)
(b) Some believe that a too narrow interpretation of the requirement ‘in writing’ could be
countervailed by making use of a device called ‘favor executionis’: if so, please describe how this
device could fit in under the reign of the New York Convention 1958. (3 points)
Suppose that after an inquiry, the arbitration panel, while following the ‘competence-competence’ rule,
denies competence. Further suppose that since NYInsurance Inc. remains unwilling to pay compensation
for a series of accidents involving some of the taxi drivers, TaxiFleet Inc. plans to initiate proceedings
against NYInsurance Inc. in the court of Delaware.
(c) Explain whether the court of Delaware (U.S.) may accept jurisdiction to adjudicate the
conflict (3 points).
Re-sit Exam 2019-2020
April 6, 2020, 9.00 – 12.00
, Question 1
TaxiFleet Inc., a corporation duly established in Delaware (U.S.), provides services to clients exclusively in
New York. The corporation employs 120 taxi drivers who are insured under a contract between TaxiFleet
Inc. and NYInsurance Inc.
Following ‘way too many accidents as a consequence of negligent attitudes of taxi drivers, resulting in an
unacceptable increase of insurance compensation claims’ (quote: NYInsurance Inc.) a conflict arises
between TaxiFleet Inc. and NYInsurance Inc.
Before even discussing the substance of the dispute, the conflicting parties disagree on how to
adjudicate the dispute: in arbitration proceedings or in court? NYInsurance Inc. adamantly sticks to the
view there is agreement on arbitration, as the insurance policy clearly provides for the following:
‘Any dispute between NYInsurance Inc. and the insured will be submitted to arbitration under the
auspices of the NYIAC (New York International Arbitration Center)’
TaxiFleetInc., however, while acknowledging this document as being ‘one out of many’, observes that it
was never signed. The only document signed was a so called ‘framework insurance contract’, the final
provision referring to ‘implementation documents’ separately dispatched to ‘the insured’.
(a) Discuss the respective positions of the parties with respect to the existence of mutual
consent on the resolving disputes through arbitration. (4 points)
(b) Some believe that a too narrow interpretation of the requirement ‘in writing’ could be
countervailed by making use of a device called ‘favor executionis’: if so, please describe how this
device could fit in under the reign of the New York Convention 1958. (3 points)
Suppose that after an inquiry, the arbitration panel, while following the ‘competence-competence’ rule,
denies competence. Further suppose that since NYInsurance Inc. remains unwilling to pay compensation
for a series of accidents involving some of the taxi drivers, TaxiFleet Inc. plans to initiate proceedings
against NYInsurance Inc. in the court of Delaware.
(c) Explain whether the court of Delaware (U.S.) may accept jurisdiction to adjudicate the
conflict (3 points).
