Changes

Tamara Arbitration

No change in size, 22:37, 14 February 2014

no edit summary

On 7 November 2012 the claimants submitted their statement arguing that the language of the arbitration should be Dutch because:

- * the contract of affreightment under which the dispute had arisen contained a choice of

Dutch law and Tamara arbitration in Rotterdam, the Netherlands;

- * the proceedings were under Tamara rules, which are of Dutch origin;

- * the lawyers acting for the parties were qualified under Dutch law;

- * the three arbitrators were Dutch;

- * the principle of equality of arms led to the application of Dutch law because the

respondents' lawyer was bilingual (English and Dutch) whereas the claimants' lawyer was

not. This gave the respondents an unfair advantage.

2,049

edits