1. The subject of the dispute is the cancellation of the arbitral tribunal’s decision to recover penalties from the farm enterprise in favor of the limited liability company for violation of the supply agreement.
2. The court overturned the decision of the arbitral tribunal because it found that the case was not subject to the jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal, since there was no arbitration agreement between the parties, because the supply agreement, which contained the arbitration clause, was not signed by an authorized person of the farm enterprise, which is confirmed by the conclusions of expert examinations and a court decision in another case. The court noted that when deciding on the cancellation of the decision of the arbitral tribunal, the commercial court simultaneously decides on the validity or invalidity of the arbitration agreement if the relevant arguments are made by a party, referring to the practice of the Supreme Court. In addition, the court took into account that the farm enterprise was located in the combat zone and occupation, which complicated the timely appeal to the court, and renewed the term for appealing the decision of the arbitral tribunal.
3. The court upheld the appellate court’s ruling granting the application of the farm enterprise and overturning the decision of the arbitral tribunal.
Leave a comment
