What’s wrong with my arbitration clause?, Practical Law UK Practice Note 2-500-1809 | |
What’s wrong with my arbitration clause?
我的仲裁条款有什么问题？
Maintained • International |
A practice note that considers a number of “pathological” (or, badly drafted) arbitration clauses and offers drafting guidance.
" 病态" （或起草不当）仲裁条款的实务说明，并提供起草指导。
Scope of this note
本说明的范围
An arbitration clause (or arbitration agreement) is at the core of all arbitration proceedings. Ensuring that the arbitration clause is drafted effectively and adapted to the parties’ needs is of utmost importance. Badly drafted arbitration clauses can give rise to time consuming litigation and jeopardise the chances of enforcing an award.
仲裁条款（或仲裁协议）是所有仲裁程序的核心。确保仲裁条款的起草有效并符合当事人的需求至关重要。起草不当的仲裁条款会导致耗时的诉讼，并危及执行裁决的机会。
This Practice note considers a number of “pathological” arbitration clauses, that is, badly drafted clauses that fail to achieve the object of imposing a clear and binding obligation to arbitrate disputes. This note forms part of our Training materials, What’s wrong with my arbitration clause? and provides a commentary to accompany the illustrative slides.
本实践指南考虑了一些""" 仲裁 条款、即起草不当的条款，这些条款未能实现规定明确且具有约束力的争议仲裁义务这一目标。本说明是我们的培训材料《'我的仲裁条款有问题吗？ 的一部分，并为说明性幻灯片提供了评注。
For a discussion on drafting effective arbitration agreements, see Practice note, Drafting international arbitration agreements: an overview, Drafting arbitration agreements: checklist and Video, International arbitration (3): drafting an effective arbitration agreement
有关起草有效仲裁协议的讨论，请参见实践说明，起草国际仲裁协议：概览, 起草仲裁协议：核对表 和 视频，国际仲裁（3）：起草有效的仲裁协议。.
For a collection of all of our resources on arbitration agreements, see International arbitration clauses toolkit
有关仲裁协议的所有资源，请参阅 国际仲裁条款工具包。.
Pathological clause
The term “pathological clause” (”clause pathologique”) was first coined by Frederic Eisemann, a former Secretary General of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) International Court of Arbitration in an important article written in 1974 (La clause d’arbitrage pathologique, Commercial Arbitration Essays in Memoriam Eugenio Minoli, U.T.E.T. 1974). In essence, it refers to an arbitration clause that has been so badly drafted so as to be potentially invalid and therefore, ineffective. He identified four criteria relating to the essential functions of an arbitration clause:
It should produce mandatory consequences for the parties. It should exclude the intervention of state courts in the settlement of the dispute. It should give powers to the arbitrators to resolve the disputes likely to arise between the parties. It should permit a procedure which leads, under the best conditions of efficiency and rapidity, to the rendering of an enforceable award. For further general discussion about pathological clauses, see Redfern & Hunter, Law and Practice of International Commercial Arbitration (Oxford University Press, 7th ed, 2022), paragraphs 2.218-2.225 and David Joseph QC, Jurisdiction and Arbitration Agreements and their Enforcement (Sweet & Maxwell, 3rd ed, 2015), paragraphs 4.44-4.86
For further guidance about drafting arbitration clauses, see:
Practice note, Drafting international arbitration agreements: an overview Practice note, Drafting multi-party and multi-contract arbitration clauses Practice note, Hybrid, multi-tiered and carve-out dispute resolution clauses Checklist, Drafting arbitration agreements Toolkit, International arbitration clauses Standard clause, International commercial arbitration clause |
Clause 1
第 1 條
”English law – arbitration, if any, London according ICC Rules”
"英国法律--仲裁（如有），根据国际商会规则在伦敦进行".
Comment
评论
This clause was considered in Arab-African Energy Corp Ltd v Olieprodukten Nederland BV [1983] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 419
该条款在Arab-African Energy Corp Ltd v Olieprodukten Nederland BV [1983] 2 Lloyd's Rep 419中得到考虑。.
The obvious problem with this clause, and in particular the phrase “if any”, is that it does not clearly impose an obligation to arbitrate disputes. A claimant could argue that it was entitled to commence proceedings in court rather than arbitrating. Alternatively, a respondent to arbitral proceedings could argue that its express agreement was required before any arbitration could be commenced pursuant to the clause. Such satellite disputes increase the risk of court intervention and also increase the costs and delay involved in arbitrating a dispute.
该条款的明显问题，特别是"if any" 一语，在于它没有明确规定仲裁争议的义务。申请人可以辩称自己有权向法院提起诉讼，而不是进行仲裁。或者，仲裁程序的被申请人可以辩称，在根据该条款启动任何仲裁之前，必须先征得其明确同意。此类附属争议增加了法院干预的风险，也增加了仲裁争议所涉及的成本和延误。
Practice point
练习点
Use clear and mandatory language that imposes a contractual obligation to arbitrate.
使用明确的强制性语言，规定仲裁的合同义务。
Clause 2
第 2 條
”This Agreement shall be interpreted in accordance with and governed in all respects by the provisions and statutes of the International Chamber of Commerce in Zürich, Switzerland and subsidiary by the laws of Germany.”
" 本协议应根据瑞士 Zürich 国际商会的规定和章程进行解释，并在所有方面受德国法律管辖。"
Comment
评论
This clause was considered by the Swiss Supreme Court in July 2015 in decision 4A_676/2014. It upheld the decision of the arbitral tribunal that this clause was not a valid arbitration agreement because it did not refer to “arbitration” or even “dispute”. For further discussion, see Legal update, Clause referring to ‘International Chamber of Commerce, Zürich’ with no reference to arbitration or dispute settlement is not a valid arbitration agreement (Swiss Supreme Court)
2015年7月，瑞士最高法院在4A_676/2014号裁决中审议了该条款。它维持了仲裁庭的裁决，即该条款不是有效的仲裁协议，因为它没有提及"arbitration" 甚至 "dispute" 。进一步讨论，见 法律更新，提及' 国际商会的条款、Zürich' 没有提及仲裁或争议解决的条款不是有效的仲裁协议（瑞士最高法院）。.
Practice point
练习点
Refer expressly to arbitration as the chosen method of dispute resolution between the parties.
明确将仲裁作为双方争议解决的选定方法。
Clause 3
第 3 條
”In case of dispute the parties undertake to submit to arbitration, but in case of litigation the Tribunal de la Seine shall have exclusive jurisdiction”
"在发生争端时，双方承诺提交仲裁，但在诉讼时，塞纳河法庭拥有专属管辖权"。.
Comment
评论
It is unclear from this clause whether the parties are obliged to arbitrate or not. The use of the phrase “undertake to submit” suggests a binding obligation to arbitrate disputes, but the further reference to the possibility of litigation at the Tribunal de la Seine is inconsistent with this. In short, the clause is internally inconsistent.
从该条款中看不出当事人是否有义务进行仲裁。使用"undertake to submit" 短语暗示了仲裁争议的约束性义务，但进一步提及在塞纳河法庭提起诉讼的可能性与此不符。简而言之，该条款内部不一致。
It may be that the parties wished to refer some disputes to arbitration and others to litigation, or to have an option to arbitrate (with litigation as a backup). However, the clause fails to spell out the desired mechanism. The parties should specify which disputes are to be referred to arbitration and which to litigation, and (in the case of an option) when, and by whom, the option can be exercised (although, note that different jurisdictions take different approaches to the enforceability of option clauses). This clause is insufficiently clear in this regard and is likely to give rise to expensive and time-consuming satellite disputes.
当事人可能希望将一些争议提交仲裁，而将另一些争议提交诉讼，或者选择仲裁（以诉讼作为后备）。然而，该条款未能阐明所希望的机制。当事人应明确哪些争议应提交仲裁，哪些应提交诉讼，以及（在选择权的情况下）何时和由谁来行使选择权（但要注意的是，不同的司法管辖区对选择权条款的可执行性采取不同的方法）。该条款在这方面不够明确，很可能会引起昂贵和耗时的附属纠纷。
Practice points
练习要点
Ensure clause is internally consistent.
确保条款的内部一致性。
Make a clear choice between litigation or arbitration.
明确选择诉讼还是仲裁。
If some types of dispute are to be referred to arbitration and others to litigation, identify as clearly and precisely as possible which disputes are to be referred to arbitration and which are to be referred to litigation. See Clause 9 below.
如果某些类型的争议将提交仲裁，而其他类型的争议将提交诉讼，则应尽可能清楚、准确地指明哪些争议将提交仲裁，哪些争议将提交诉讼。请参阅 下文第 9 条 。
Clause 4
第 4 條
”Any dispute of whatever nature arising out of or in any way relating to the Agreement or to its construction or fulfillments may be referred to arbitration. Such arbitration shall take place in USA and shall proceed in accordance with the Rules of Conciliation and Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce”
"因本协议或协议的解释或履行而引起的或与之有关的任何性质的争端均可提交仲裁。仲裁应在美国进行，并应按照《国际商会调解和仲裁规则》进行"。.
Comment
评论
Although this provision could be construed as an option to arbitrate, exercisable by either party, the use of the word “may” is ambiguous. A party may seek to argue that a further agreement between the parties is required to give rise to a binding obligation to arbitrate. In other words, the clause is simply recognising the possibility that the parties will, in the future, agree to arbitrate (and, in that event, specifying the seat and applicable rules). Such uncertainties can be minimised by avoiding permissive language such as “may”
虽然该条款可被解释为任一当事方均可行使的仲裁选择权，但 "可 "字的使用是模棱两可的。一方当事人可能会辩称，双方当事人之间必须达成进一步协议，才能产生具有约束力的仲裁义务。换句话说，该条款只是承认当事人将来有可能同意仲裁（并在此情况下指定仲裁地和适用规则）。避免使用 "可 "等允许性语言，可最大限度地减少此类不确定性。.
In the case of an option, no binding obligation to arbitrate arises unless and until one party elects to exercise it. This raises the possibility of the other party seeking to pre-empt such an election by commencing proceedings in a different forum.
就选择权而言，除非一方当事人选择行使，否则不会产生具有约束力的仲裁义务。这就产生了另一方当事人通过在不同法院启动诉讼程序来预先阻止这种选择的可能性。
Practice points
练习要点
Avoid ambiguous language.
避免模棱两可的语言。
Use mandatory language (for example, “shall be referred to arbitration”).
使用强制性语言（例如，"应提交仲裁" ）。
Consider carefully before agreeing to an option to arbitrate.
在同意选择仲裁之前，请慎重考虑。
Draft any option clearly and precisely.
清晰准确地起草任何方案。
Ad-hoc clause: provide for the number of arbitrators and the appointment mechanism.
特设条款：规定仲裁员人数和指定机制。
Clause 5
第 5 條
”Any dispute shall be solved by arbitration, but if the parties do not agree on the award, the Tribunal of Tunis shall be competent”
"任何争端均应通过仲裁解决，但如果各方未就裁决达成一致意见，则突尼斯法庭有权"。.
Comment
评论
This clause does not impose a clear and unequivocal obligation to arbitrate. It suggests that the parties are required to “agree on the award”, a concept that is inconsistent with an obligation to arbitrate. An arbitration award is binding on the parties regardless of whether they have “agreed on” it.
该条款没有规定明确无误的仲裁义务。它暗示各方当事人必须" 就裁决达成一致意见" ，这一概念与仲裁义务不一致。仲裁裁决对各方当事人都具有约束力，无论他们是否" 同意" 仲裁裁决。
Further issues may arise in relation to the attempted submission to the Tribunal of Tunis. The clause apparently attempts to confer non-exclusive jurisdiction on that court, raising the possibility of parallel proceedings being commenced in some other unspecified forum.
在试图提交突尼斯法庭方面可能会出现更多问题。该条款显然试图赋予该法庭非专属管辖权，这就有可能在其他一些未指定的法庭启动平行诉 讼程序。
Practice points
练习要点
Ensure clause is internally consistent.
确保条款的内部一致性。
Define clearly which disputes are to be arbitrated and which are to go to court.
明确界定哪些争议应通过仲裁解决，哪些应诉诸法院。
Clause 6
第 6 條
”Any dispute arising under this contract shall be resolved by arbitration at the ICC of Geneva”
"本合同项下产生的任何争议应由日内瓦国际商会仲裁解决".
Comment
评论
This clause demonstrates a relatively commonplace error. It appears that the parties intended to refer disputes to ICC arbitration, with a seat in Geneva. However, in using the term “ICC of Geneva” they have misdescribed the ICC (which is based in Paris, there is no “ICC of Geneva”). Similar errors in previous cases include the use of phrases such as “Arbitration Chamber of Paris” or “The Tribunal of the Paris Chamber of Commerce”
该条款显示了一个相对常见的错误。双方似乎有意将争议提交设在日内瓦的国际商会仲裁。然而，在使用 "日内瓦国际商会 "一词时，他们错误地描述了国际商会（总部设在巴黎，没有 "日内瓦国际商会"）。以往案件中的类似错误包括使用 "巴黎仲裁院 "或 "巴黎商会法庭 "等短语.
Practice points
练习要点
If opting for institutional arbitration, name the chosen institution correctly.
如果选择机构仲裁，请正确填写所选机构的名称。
Specify the arbitral seat clearly.
明确指定仲裁地。
Clause 7
第 7 條
”Any dispute … between the Parties arising out of or relating to this Agreement which cannot be settled amicably shall be referred to and determined by arbitration in the Hague under the International Arbitration Rules”
"因本协定引起的或与本协定有关的......双方之间的任何争端，如不能友好解 决，则应根据《国际仲裁规则》提交海牙仲裁裁决。.
Comment
评论
This clause was considered by the US First Circuit Court of Appeals in Marks 3-Zet-Ernst Marks GmbH and Co KG v Presstek Inc., 455 F.3d 7, 15 (1st Cir. 2006), where the court denied a request to compel arbitration.
美国第一巡回上诉法院在Marks 3-Zet-Ernst Marks GmbH and Co KG 诉 Presstek Inc、455 F.3d 7, 15 (1st Cir. 2006), 法院驳回了强制仲裁的请求。
The essential problem is that, while it is arguable (and was argued) that the parties intended to refer disputes to the Permanent Court of Arbitration (based in the Hague), the clause does not actually identify any specific arbitral institution. Furthermore, there are no arbitration rules entitled the “International Arbitration Rules”. This problem could have been avoided by more careful and accurate drafting.
根本问题在于，虽然可以争辩（并且已经争辩）双方当事人打算将争议提交常设仲裁法院（设在海牙），但该条款实际上并没有确定任何具体的仲裁机构。此外，也没有题为" 国际仲裁规则" 的仲裁规则。这个问题本可以通过更加谨慎和准确的起草来避免。
Practice points
练习要点
If opting for institutional arbitration, name the chosen institution (and any applicable rules) correctly.
如果选择机构仲裁，请正确填写所选机构的名称（以及任何适用的规则）。
Specify the arbitral seat clearly.
明确指定仲裁地。
Clause 8
條例草案第8條
”Arbitration at local chamber of commerce”
"地方商会仲裁".
Comment
评论
The clause fails to identify what the “local” chamber of commerce is, does it mean local to the parties or their lawyers, local to the subject matter of the contract, or local to the dispute? Any party wishing to commence arbitration pursuant to the clause would be uncertain as to where and how to commence arbitration.
该条款未能确定什么是" 本地" 商会，是指当事人或其律师的本地，合同标的的本地，还是争议的本地？任何希望根据该条款启动仲裁的当事人都无法确定在哪里以及如何启动仲裁。
Practice point
练习点
Seat and institution should be identified clearly.
应明确标明座位和机构。
Clause 9
第 9 條
”All differences resulting from the present Contract for FOB-related disputes shall be settled according to the arbitration and legal provisions governing the seller’s FOB contract from its supplier for the cargo(s) in question. CIF related disputes shall be settled in Japan according to Japanese law”
"由本合同引起的与 FOB 有关的所有争议应根据卖方与其供应商签订的有关货物的 FOB 合同的仲裁和法律规定解决。与 CIF 有关的争议应根据日本法律在日本解决"。.
Comment
评论
Although in theory it is possible to split disputes and refer them to different fora, in practice this can raise difficulties and increase costs. It is also difficult to draft a clause that cleanly splits the disputes between the chosen fora. In relation to this particular clause, it may not always be clear whether a sale contract is in fact an FOB sale, in which case jurisdictional disputes would arise. Further issues may arise if the respondent to an arbitration under an FOB sale contract wished to set off counterclaims arising under a CIF contract. To some extent, such issues are inherent problems of split or carve-out clauses, but they can be minimised by very careful and precise drafting.
虽然理论上可以将争议分开并提交给不同的法庭，但在实践中可能会造成困难并增加成本。此外，也很难起草一个条款，将争议在所选择的法庭之间干净利落地分割开来。就这一特殊条款而言，销售合同事实上是否为离岸价销售可能并不总是很清楚，在这种情况下就会产生管辖权争议。如果根据离岸价销售合同进行仲裁的被申请人希望抵消根据到岸价合同提出的反诉，则可能会产生更多问题。在某种程度上，这些问题是拆分或分割条款所固有的问题，但可以通过非常谨慎和精确的起草将其最小化。
Practice points
练习要点
Avoid splitting the clause into an arbitration and litigation dispute resolution clause.
避免将条款拆分为仲裁和诉讼争议解决条款。
Consider “carve out” clauses, and their ramifications, carefully.
仔细考虑" 划出" 条款及其影响。
When drafting a “carve out” clause, define carefully and precisely the classes of disputes, with a view to avoiding any grey areas or satellite jurisdictional arguments.
在起草" 免责条款" 时，应仔细准确地界定争议的类别，以避免出现任何灰色地带或卫星管辖权争论。
Clause 10
條例草案第10條
”Disputes arising in connection with this agreement shall be referred to Mr X acting as sole arbitrator. The seat of the arbitration shall be London”
"与本协议有关的争议应交由 X 先生担任独任仲裁员。仲裁地点为伦敦"。.
Comment
评论
This arbitration agreement would be impossible to perform if Mr X was unable or unwilling to accept appointment as arbitrator. In such a case, the arbitration agreement becomes impossible to perform.
如果 X 先生不能或不愿接受指定为仲裁员，该仲裁协议将无法履行。在这种情况下，仲裁协议将无法履行。
Practice point
练习点
Do not name the arbitrator in the arbitration clause.
不要在仲裁条款中指定仲裁员。
Clause 11
條例草案第11條
”Disputes arising in connection with this agreement shall be determined by a single arbitrator to be appointed by the Director General of the World Health Organization”
"与本协定有关的争议应由世界卫生组织总干事指定的一名仲裁员裁决".
Comment
评论
Although it is often sensible to specify an appointing body, it is important to ensure that the appointing body is willing to act as such. This is a real clause that was considered by the Swiss Federal Tribunal after the Director General of the WHO refused to act.
虽然指定一个指定机构通常是明智之举，但必须确保指定机构愿意担任指定机 构。在世卫组织总干事拒绝作为之后，瑞士联邦法庭审议了这一真实条款。
Practice point
练习点
When naming an appointing body, ensure that the body named is able and willing to act if required.
在指定指定机构时，应确保所指定的机构能够并愿意在需要时采取行动。
Several leading arbitral institutions, including the LCIA, HKIAC and SIAC, are able (and willing) to act as appointing authorities even if the arbitration is not concluded using their rules.
包括伦敦国际仲裁院（LCIA）、香港国际仲裁中心（HKIAC）和新加坡国际仲裁中心（SIAC）在内的几家主要仲裁机构能够（并愿意）担任指定机构，即使仲裁不是按照它们的规则进行的。
Clause 12
條例草案第12條
”Any dispute arising in connection with this contract shall be referred to arbitration. The tribunal shall publish its award within 2 months of the reference to arbitration”
"与本合同有关的任何争议均应提交仲裁。仲裁庭应在提交仲裁后 2 个月内公布其裁决"。.
Comment
评论
It is sensible to aim for speed and efficiency in the conduct of the arbitration. However, a short contractual deadline for the publication of any award is likely to be counterproductive. If the deadline is not adhered to, questions would then arise as to whether any subsequent award complied with the clause and was therefore binding on the parties.
在仲裁过程中追求速度和效率是明智之举。然而，合同规定的公布裁决的最后期限过短可能会适得其反。如果不遵守最后期限，就会出现随后的裁决是否符合条款规定并因此对当事人具有约束力的问题。
Practice points
练习要点
Do not specify immutable deadlines in the arbitration clause.
不要在仲裁条款中规定不可更改的最后期限。
Consider opting for arbitration rules that facilitate speedy decision making.
考虑选择有利于快速做出决定的仲裁规则。
Clause 13
條例草案第13條
”Any disputes arising under this contract shall be submitted to the exclusive jurisdiction of the Indian courts. Disputes arising in connection with the execution and performance of this contract shall be referred to arbitration in London”
"本合同项下产生的任何争议应提交印度法院专属管辖。与执行和履行本合同有关的争议应提交伦敦仲裁"。.
Comment
评论
These clauses exemplify another common error, that is, separate dispute resolution clauses that are not consistent with each other. Often this is the result of cutting and pasting old contract forms. It may be possible to make sense of the clauses. For example, it could be argued that the arbitration clause (which is limited to disputes arising in connection with “execution and performance”) is a specifically agreed exception to the more general Indian jurisdiction clause. Alternatively, if one of the clauses is a specifically negotiated clause and the other is a printed standard form, the former may take precedence. However, it is obviously preferable to avoid such issues.
这些条款体现了另一个常见错误，即单独的争议解决条款彼此不一致。这通常是剪切和粘贴旧合同表格的结果。这些条款或许可以理解。例如，可以认为仲裁条款（仅限于与" 执行和履行" 相关的争议）是对更一般的印度管辖权条款特别约定的例外。或者，如果其中一个条款是专门协商的条款，而另一个条款是印刷的标准格式，则前者可以优先。不过，显然最好避免此类问题。
Practice point
练习点
Do not cut and paste old clauses without considering their overall meaning and effect.
不要在不考虑其整体含义和效果的情况下剪切和粘贴旧条款。
Check the contract to ensure that there are no inconsistent provisions.
检查合同，确保没有不一致的条款。
Clause 14
條例草案第14條
”Any disputes arising from the interpretation of the present contract will be settled by an arbitral tribunal sitting in a country other than that of each of the parties”
"因解释本合同而产生的任何争议，将由当事双方所在国以外的仲裁庭解决"； "......"。.
Comment
评论
There are several issues with this clause. The most important is the failure to specify a seat, number of arbitrators or appointment mechanism. A claimant faced with a recalcitrant defendant may need assistance from a local court in order to constitute the tribunal. However, as the seat of the arbitration is not specified, it would be difficult to know which court to apply to. Such issues can be avoided by opting for institutional arbitration or, failing that, by clearly specifying the seat of the arbitration, the number of arbitrators and an appointment mechanism.
该条款存在若干问题。最重要的是没有规定仲裁地、仲裁员人数或指定机制。面对顽固不化的被告，申请人可能需要当地法院的协助才能组成仲裁庭。然而，由于没有指定仲裁地，很难知道向哪个法院提出申请。如果选择机构仲裁，或者如果不选择机构仲裁，则明确规定仲裁地、仲裁员人数和指定机制，就可以避免这些问题。
Practice points
练习要点
Identify the seat of the arbitration.
确定仲裁地。
Consider specifying the number of arbitrators and appointment mechanism.
考虑规定仲裁员人数和任命机制。
Clause 15
條例草案第15條
”The decision of the Superintending Engineer of the Gulbarga Circle for the time being shall be final, conclusive and binding on all parties to the contract upon any questions or disputes relating to the meaning of the specifications, designs, drawings and instructions herein before mentioned”
"Gulbarga Circle 监理工程师的决定是最终的、决定性的和对合同各方有约束力的，如果有任何问题或争议涉及到上述规格、设计、图纸和说明的含义"。.
Comment
评论
It is not entirely clear whether this clause contemplates arbitration or expert determination. The reference to “disputes” suggests the former, but the nature of the issues to be referred to the Superintending Engineer, and the failure to stipulate for arbitration, may be more consistent with expert determination.
该条款是设想仲裁还是专家裁决并不完全清楚。"disputes" 的提法表明是前者，但提交监理工程师的问题的性质以及没有规定仲裁，可能更符合专家裁决。
The failure to clearly opt for a particular form of dispute resolution is a serious error, as the enforcement mechanisms differ drastically according to whether arbitration or expert determination is chosen.
没有明确选择特定的争议解决形式是一个严重错误，因为执行机制因选择仲裁还是专家裁决而大相径庭。
Practice point
练习点
Provide specifically for expert determination.
专门提供专家鉴定。
Clause 16
條例草案第16條
”Choice of Law and Arbitration
" 法律和仲裁选择
(a) The construction, validity and performance of this Policy, shall be governed by the laws of England and all disputes that may arise under, out of, or in relation to this Policy ... shall be submitted to arbitration at the London Court of International Arbitration ...
(a) 本《保单》的解释、有效性和履行应受英国法律管辖，根据本《保单》产生的、由本《保单》引起的或与本《保单》有关的所有争议......应提交伦敦国际仲裁法院仲裁......。
(b) The parties hereto agree that the speedy resolution of any disputes between them ... is a mutual and material inducement to enter into this Policy and that this in no way infringes on any right accorded in the Service of Suit clause of this Policy the effect of which is to provide without waiver of any defence an ultimate assurance of the amenability of the Underwriters to process of certain courts.
(b) 双方同意，迅速解决双方之间的任何争议......是双方签订本保单的一个重要诱 因，这绝不会侵犯本保单诉讼送达条款所赋予的任何权利，该条款的作用是在 不放弃任何抗辩的情况下，最终保证承保人可以接受某些法院的诉讼程序。
(c) Service of suit (NMA 1998) in respect of US Insureds: It is agreed that in the event of the failure of the Underwriters hereon to pay any amount claimed to be due hereunder, Underwriters ... will submit to the jurisdiction of a court of competent jurisdiction within the United States ... It is further agreed ... in any suit instituted against any one of them upon this Policy, Underwriters will abide by the final determination of such court”
(c) 针对美国被保险人的诉讼送达（NMA 1998）：双方同意，如果承保人未能支付根据本保单声称应支付的任何金额，承保人......将服从美国境内有管辖权的法院的管辖......。还同意......在根据本保单对其中任何一方提起的任何诉讼中，承保人将服从该法院的最终裁决"。.
Comment
评论
This clause is based on the provision considered in ACE Capital Ltd and others v CMS Energy Corporation and others [2008] EWHC 1843 (Comm) (see Legal update, Interpretation of arbitration agreement and service of suit clause).
本条款基于 ACE Capital Ltd and others v CMS Energy Corporation and others [2008] EWHC 1843 (Comm)（见 Legal update、仲裁协议和送达诉讼条款的解释）。
Sub-paragraph (c) is a service of suit clause. Such clauses are frequently used in insurance contracts to ensure that insurers who are not licensed in the US are nevertheless subject to personal jurisdiction in the US courts, for example, for the purposes of enforcement of an arbitration award.
(c)项是诉讼送达条款。此类条款经常用于保险合同中，以确保未在美国获得许可的保险人仍受美国法院的属人管辖权管辖，例如，为了执行仲裁裁决。
On its face, the clause is inconsistent with the preceding paragraph (a), which refers disputes to arbitration. However, in ACE Capital the judge noted that:
从表面上看，该条款与前面的(a)款不一致，后者将争议提交仲裁。然而，在 ACE Capital 案中，法官指出：
”the bulk of US authority ... treats an arbitration clause and a Service of Suit clause as not inconsistent with each other, interpreting the latter as intended to ensure that the insurer/reinsurer is subject to personal jurisdiction in any one of the States for the purpose of, inter alia, enforcement of the award.”
"大部分美国权威......将仲裁条款和诉讼送达条款视为互不矛盾，将后者解释为旨在确保保险人/再保险人在任何一个国家都受属人管辖权管辖，以便执行裁决等。
Also, given the strong policy in favour of arbitration in both the US and England, it is likely that the court will attempt to treat a service of suit clause as consistent with an arbitration agreement. Despite this, it is prudent to avoid any wording that may suggest that the court has jurisdiction to determine substantive issues. In ACE Capital, the court was driven to the conclusion that the words “in any suit instituted against any one of them upon this policy” were to be ignored as not reflecting the parties’ agreement to arbitrate.
此外，鉴于美国和英国都有支持仲裁的强有力政策，法院很可能会试图将诉讼送达条款视为与仲裁协议一致。尽管如此，谨慎的做法是避免使用任何可能暗示法院有权决定实质性问题的措辞。在ACE Capital、法院得出的结论是，"在根据本保单对其中任何一方提起的任何诉讼中"应忽略不计，因为这并不反映双方的仲裁协议。
Practice point
练习点
Take particular care with service of suit clauses to avoid internal inconsistency.
特别注意诉讼送达条款，以避免内部不一致。