EGYPT Law and Practice Contributed by: Ahmed Kotb, Mohamed Ehab, Mohamed Sameh and Yasmine ElSakka, Khodeir & Partners
13.4 Consolidation The EAL does not regulate the consolidation of sepa - rate arbitral proceedings. However, Egyptian law gen - erally recognises party autonomy and the wide discre - tionary powers of arbitral tribunals, especially those constituted under institutional rules. The 2024 CRCICA Arbitration Rules introduced for the first time express provisions for the consolidation of arbitration proceedings (Article 50), permitting con - solidation under specific conditions. These include instances where the parties agree to consolidation, or where the claims in the separate proceedings arise out of the same legal relationship and the arbitration agreements are compatible. The tribunal (or CRCICA if a tribunal is not yet constituted) may also consider efficiency and procedural fairness when deciding whether to consolidate. In ad hoc arbitrations, consolidation would only be possible where parties have agreed to it – either explicitly or by incorporating institutional rules that allow it. Without such agreement, Egyptian courts or arbitral tribunals do not have inherent statutory power to order consolidation. 13.5 Binding of Third Parties As noted in 5.6 Jurisdiction Over Third Parties , Egyp - tian courts recognise, in limited circumstances, the possibility of extending the effects of an arbitration agreement to third parties. This typically arises in complex corporate or contractual structures – such as in cases involving the “group of companies” doc - trine, where non-signatory affiliates may be deemed to have consented to arbitration through their conduct or involvement in the performance of the contract. This approach is supported by jurisprudence of the Court of Cassation (eg, Challenge No. 3100 of JY 86, dated 13 March 2018).
However, while an arbitration agreement may bind a third party in exceptional cases, arbitral awards them - selves do not ordinarily have binding effect on third parties that were not participants in the arbitration. A key exception to this arises under Article 328 of the CCPC, which allows an award creditor to temporarily attach the movable assets or debts of the award debt - or that are in the possession of a third party. In such cases, the third party is only procedurally involved to the extent necessary for enforcement – not as a sub - stantive party to the arbitration or the award. As for foreign third parties, Egyptian courts lack extra - territorial jurisdiction to directly bind them through arbi - tral awards or attachment proceedings. Nonetheless, in narrowly defined circumstances – such as where simulated or sham contracts have been concluded between the award debtor and a foreign third party for the purpose of concealing assets and obstructing enforcement – courts may entertain motions or legal actions to pierce through these arrangements. In such cases, the court may issue judgments or enforcement orders aimed at preserving the integrity of the arbi - tral process and safeguarding the rights of the award creditor.
201 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook