ПРОТИВТУЖБА У АРБИТРАЖНОМ СПОРУ
COUNTERCHARGE IN THE ARBITRATION DISPUTE

Summary/Abstract: The basic issue discussed in the present article relates to the jurisdiction of the foreign trade arbitration for the countercharge in case such arbitration has been agreed upon by means of a compromise clause providing for the competence of two arbitration instances — one having the seat in the country of one of the parties, and the other, in the country of the other party. In such a case the parties most frequently agree that their dispute should be settled by the arbitration court of the defendant party. While answering negatively to the question whether by means of such compromise clause the jurisdiction is excluded of the arbitration of the defendant’s country for the countercharge, the author considers the following arguments: — excluding the arbitration of the defendant’s country for the countercharge would mean justifying the distrust of the plaintiff towards the arbitration; — both parties, through the compromise clause they accepted, set forth the jurisdiction of the arbitration in the defendant’s country; — such conception is in concordance to the Belgrade Foreign Trade Arbitration Tribunal’s Regulations.

• Details
• Contents