Portugal / 19 June 2013 / Portugal, Tribunal da Relação de Coimbra (Coimbra Court of Appeal) / Unifac v. Barod / 1630/06.2YRCBR.C2
| Country | Portugal |
| Court | Portugal, Tribunal da Relação de Coimbra (Coimbra Court of Appeal) |
| Date | 19 June 2013 |
| Parties | Unifac v. Barod |
| Case number | 1630/06.2YRCBR.C2 |
| Applicable NYC Provisions | V | V(1) | V(1)(a) |
| Source |
http://www.dgsi.pt (official website of the Instituto de Gestão Financeira e Equipamentos da Justiça I.P.) |
| Languages | English |
| Summary | Company A and Company B entered into two agreements for the sale of Brazilian yellow soybeans. Both agreements contained an arbitration clause providing for arbitration in London under the Grain and Feed Trade Association (“GAFTA”) Arbitration Rules. A dispute arose and Company A initiated two arbitral proceedings in London in accordance with the GAFTA Arbitration Rules. Company B did not participate in the arbitral proceedings and the two awards were rendered in Company A’s favour. Company B did not appeal any of the arbitral awards. Company A then sought and was granted recognition of both awards before the Tribunal Judicial de Castelo Branco (Castelo Branco Court of First Instance). Company B appealed to the Tribunal da Relação de Coimbra (Coimbra Court of Appeal) on the grounds that (i) arbitration agreements contained in standard form contracts not negotiated by the parties are illegal under Portuguese law and (ii) recognition of the awards should be denied as it was not aware of the content of the arbitration agreement. The Tribunal da Relação de Coimbra reversed the decision of the Tribunal Judicial de Castelo Branco and denied recognition of the arbitral awards. The Tribunal da Relação de Coimbra noted that the arbitration clauses were (i) “standard form clauses” since they were not negotiated by the parties and (ii) unclear given that a normal person could not understand the meaning of expressions or abbreviations such as “FOSFA 22”, “Regulation 125” and “GAFTA” contained therein. The Tribunal da Relação de Coimbra therefore held that the arbitration agreements should be excluded from the main contracts and that the arbitration clauses were invalid. It therefore denied recognition of the arbitral awards pursuant to Article V(1)(a) NYC. |
Attachment (1)
 Original Language Adobe Acrobat PDF |
