(Portugal) Supreme Court of Justice | Extension of the Arbitration Agreement | Group of Companies | 15-01-2019 | Case #087

Supreme Court of Justice Date: 15-01-2019 Case Nr. 28/14.3TBOHP.C1.S1 LINK DGSI   Headline: An arbitration agreement may be extended to non-signatory parties that belng to the same group of companies  Summary: According to Arts. 406, nr. 2 and 217, nr. 1 of the Portuguese Civil Code, the circumstance that one of the petitioners (a company […]

Read more...

Lisbon Court of Appeal | Extension of the Arbitration Agreement to Non-Signatories | Group of Companies Doctrine | Kompentenz-Kompetenz | 11-01-2011 | Case #078

Lisbon Court of Appeal Date: 11-01-2011 Case Nr. 3539/08.6TVLSB.L1 LINK DGSI Headline: The arbitration agreement concluded with a company belonging to the same group of companies only binds the contracting parties, except if a third party later accedes to that agreement. The arbitral tribunal shall be competent to interpret the arbitration clause in order to […]

Read more...

Supreme Court of Justice (Portugal) | Extension of the Arbitration Agreement to Non-Signatories | Group of Companies Doctrine | 08-09-2011 | Case #077

Supreme Court of Justice Date: 08-09-2011 Case Nr. 3539/08.6TVLSB.LL.S1 LINK DGSI Headline: In principle, the arbitration agreement binds only the contracting parties but may be enforced against or by an assignee of a contract   Summary: 1. In principle, an arbitration agreement contained in a contract only binds the contracting parties. 2. However, and in […]

Read more...

Porto Court of Appeal | Kompetenz-Kompetenz | Enforceability of Arbitration Agreements by Non-Signatories | Abuse of Rights | 08-03-2016 | Case #009

Porto Court of Appeal  Date: 08-03-2016 Case Nr. 2164/14.7TBSTS.P1 LINK DGSI Headline: State courts must confine themselves to questions of non-existence, nullity or inoperability of the arbitration clause. Non-signatories may be joint to arbitration, and can even claim to be joint in certain instances that were delineated by the Court. Summary: Art. 5(1) and 18(1) […]

Read more...