Aceris Law has assisted a Filipino respondent in obtaining the successful resolution of a JAMS international arbitration under California law brought against it. The JAMS arbitration, initiated by a U.S. public company specialising in computer network infrastructure, was brought against the Filipino company in relation to alleged breaches of a contract. The arbitration involved parallel […]
FIRST OPTIONS OF CHICAGO, INC. v. KAPLAN: Arbitrating the Question of Arbitrability U.S Supreme Court (1995)
This dispute arose out of a “workout” agreement, embodied in four separate documents, which governed the “working out” of debts to First Options that MKI incurred as a result of the October 1987 stock market crash. In 1989, after entering into the agreement, MKI lost an additional USD 1.5 million. First Options then took control […]
MEDITERRANEAN ENTERPRISE V. SSANGYONG CORP.: The Interpretation of the Words “Arising Hereunder” in an Arbitration Agreement US Court of Appeals for the 9th CIRCUIT (1983)
Mediterranean Enterprises, Inc. v. Ssangyong Construction Co. concerns the interpretation of the words “arising hereunder” in an arbitration agreement. By way of background, the parties to the proceeding signed a “Preliminary agreement on Formation of a Joint Venture” in 1978. The agreement contained an Arbitration Clause, stating that “any disputes arising hereunder or following the […]
CARD V. STRATTON OAKMONT, INC.: Arbitration and the Rules of Evidence U.S District Court of Minnesota (1996)
Card v. Stratton Oakmont concerns a motion to vacate an arbitration award brought, inter alia, on the ground that the arbitral tribunal had disregarded the rules of evidence. In September 1994, Claimant had filed for arbitration pursuant to the rules of the National Association of Securities Dealers Act (NASD) against Stratton Oakmont, claiming common law […]
McCreary Tire & Rubber Co. v. CEAT S.p.A. v. Mellon Bank NA (Garnishee) United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (1974)
This case relates to an attachment and a motion to stay a lawsuit pending arbitration. The facts are as follows: Plaintiff sued CEAT for breach of the distributorship contract. In addition, Plaintiff sued Mellon Bank. Plaintiff had previously filed a suit against CEAT before the District Court of Massachusetts, where the court ordered arbitration, according […]