France / 11 July 2006 / France, Cour de cassation / Société Generali France Assurances et al. v. Société Universal Legend et al. / 05-18.681
| Country | France |
| Court | France, Cour de cassation (French Court of Cassation) |
| Date | 11 July 2006 |
| Parties | Société Generali France Assurances et al. v. Société Universal Legend et al. |
| Case number | 05-18.681 |
| Applicable NYC Provisions | II |
| Source |
Bulletin 2006 I N° 365 p. 313, Original decision obtained from the registry of the Cour de cassation |
| Summary | A bill of lading for the transportation of goods was signed on 6 August 2002, which referred to a charter-party agreement dated 22 July 2002. The goods were damaged during transportation. The import company sought damages against the insurance companies before the Tribunal de commerce de Bordeaux (Commercial Court of Bordeaux). The insurance companies requested the joinder of the other parties to the agreement, which invoked the arbitration clause in the charter-party agreement and requested suspension of the proceedings until the arbitral tribunal ruled on its own jurisdiction. The Cour d'appel de Bordeaux (Bordeaux Court of Appeal) dismissed the action and referred the parties to arbitration. The insurance companies challenged this decision on the grounds that they were not bound by the arbitration agreement and that the lower courts had failed to establish the parties' knowledge of the arbitration agreement included in the contract by reference. They also claimed that the arbitration agreement was manifestly null and void and therefore that the decision of the Cour d'appel de Bordeaux was contrary to Article II NYC, Article 1492 of the Code of Civil Procedure and Article 1134 of the Civil Code. The Cour de cassation (Supreme Court) upheld the decision of the lower courts but did not refer to the NYC. It reasoned that the charter-party agreement contained an arbitration agreement which was binding upon the successive holders of the bill of lading. It held that the insurance companies failed to demonstrate that the arbitration agreement was manifestly void and, therefore, confirmed that the Tribunal de Commerce de Bordeaux lacked jurisdiction to hear this dispute and that the arbitrators should rule on the existence, validity and scope of the arbitration agreement. |
| see also : |
Attachment (1)
 Original Language Adobe Acrobat PDF |
