UZBEKISTAN Law and Practice Contributed by: Sherzod Abdulkasimov, Nazokat Kamilova and Navruza Yunusova, PraeLegal Uzbekistan
Questions of admissibility are treated as going to the merits, reserved to the tribunal and reviewed deferen- tially, if at all; they do not give rise to an independent jurisdictional application and are revisited only to the extent that they fall within a recognised set-aside or refusal ground. The Law on Domestic Arbitration proceeds on the same basis under Article 24, save that it offers no interlocutory route. 5.5 Breach of Arbitration Agreement Where a party sues in breach of an arbitration agree - ment, the court will not hear the merits provided the other party objects in time: under Article 13 of the ICA Law, the court must, on application made no later than the first statement on the substance of the dispute, refer the parties to arbitration unless the agreement is null and void, inoperative or incapable of being per - formed. The EP Code produces the same result before the domestic courts, as does the Law on Domestic Arbitration. Two points qualify this. The court will not act on its own motion: in the absence of a timely objection, a party that litigates without invoking the arbitration agreement is taken to have waived it. And referral is refused only where one of the narrow exceptions in Article 13 of the ICA Law is made out. The general posture of the courts is one of willingness to hold parties to their bargain and reluctance to enter - tain proceedings brought in breach of an arbitration agreement, consistent with the broadly pro-arbitration stance of the Uzbek economic courts. A claimant can - not, as a rule, use the courts to circumvent a valid agreement to arbitrate. 5.6 Jurisdiction Over Third Parties Uzbek law provides no basis for a tribunal to assume jurisdiction over a person who is neither party to the arbitration agreement nor a signatory to the contract containing it. Neither the ICA Law, the Law on Domes - tic Arbitration nor the procedural codes address the extension of an arbitration agreement to non-signato - ries, and the Uzbek courts have not yet ruled on the question. The governing premise is consent: Article 12 of the ICA Law defines an arbitration agreement as
one “between the parties”, so that it is agreement to arbitrate, and not mere connection with the underly - ing contract, that founds jurisdiction. In the absence of any statutory or judicial doctrine, there is no room for arbitration-specific theories such as the “group of companies” doctrine. A non-signatory may therefore become bound only through the general mechanisms of the applicable substantive law – assignment of contractual rights and obligations, universal or singular succession, or agency – under which the arbitration agreement pass - es with the rights and obligations to which it attaches, rather than through any arbitration-specific extension. The Law on Domestic Arbitration rests on the same consensual foundation and is likewise silent on non- signatories, so the position under the domestic regime is no different. The law draws no distinction between foreign and domestic third parties, precisely because it does not regulate the subject: whether a third party is bound turns entirely on the applicable law and the facts, irre - spective of nationality. An arbitral tribunal seated in Uzbekistan may grant interim relief. Under Article 22 of the ICA Law, it may, unless the parties agree otherwise, order interim measures at a party’s request, subject to Article 23 of the ICA Law (broadly, a reasonable prospect of suc - cess and a risk of harm not adequately reparable in damages). Such measures are binding, not merely recommendatory, and are enforceable through the competent economic court. Articles 24–25 of the ICA Law also allow preliminary (ex parte) orders to pre - serve the position pending determination; these bind the parties but are not court-enforceable. Under the Law on Domestic Arbitration, a tribunal may likewise order interim measures, which take effect between the parties and are enforced through the state courts, a party also being free to seek interim relief directly from the court without waiving the arbitration agreement. 6. Preliminary and Interim Relief 6.1 Types of Relief
1159 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook