OMAN Law and Practice Contributed by: Sultan Al Ghafri, Nasser Al Riyami, Abdullah Al Aufi and Joud Lashko, Al Khalili, Al Ghailani & Co. LLP (K&Co.)
as an agreement between its parties to refer disputes between them to arbitration, and Omani law does not contain a broad general doctrine allowing a tribunal to assume jurisdiction over parties that are neither sig - natories to that agreement nor otherwise bound by it through recognised legal principles. That said, non- signatories may in certain circumstances be bound by, and therefore subject to, an arbitration agreement, including through “group of companies” principles, agency, assignment or succession, or where a party’s conduct demonstrates clear acceptance of the arbi - tration agreement notwithstanding the absence of its signature; Article 12’s requirement that the agree - ment be evidenced in writing, including through an exchange of correspondence, is applied by the courts to assess whether such acceptance can be estab - lished in writing. Omani courts approach such ques - tions cautiously and typically require clear evidence of consent or a recognised legal basis for extending the agreement before treating a non-signatory as bound. Where such a basis can be established, Omani law does not draw a formal distinction between domestic and foreign non-signatory third parties, provided the general requirements of Omani law and public policy are otherwise satisfied. An arbitral tribunal seated in Oman is permitted to order preliminary or interim measures under Article 24 (1) of the Arbitration Law, which allows the par - ties to agree that the tribunal may, on the applica - tion of either of them, order the other to take such interim or precautionary measures as the nature of the dispute requires, and to require the provision of adequate security to cover the costs of the measure ordered. Because this power arises “by agreement of the parties”, it is generally treated as based on the parties’ consent, whether express or through adoption of institutional rules that confer such a power on the tribunal, rather than as a power the tribunal enjoys automatically in every case. Such measures are bind - ing on the parties as a matter of the tribunal’s author - ity; where the party against which the order is made fails to comply, Article 24 (2) allows the tribunal, on the other party’s application, to authorise that party to 6. Preliminary and Interim Relief 6.1 Types of Relief
take the necessary steps to give effect to the meas - ure, without prejudice to that party’s right to apply to the president of the competent Court of Appeal for an order of enforcement. The types of relief available under Article 24 are broadly framed and can include measures for the preservation of assets or evidence and orders restraining a party from taking a particular step pending the award. 6.2 Role of Courts The Omani courts play a supporting role in relation to preliminary and interim relief in arbitral proceed - ings. Article 14 of the Arbitration Law empowers the court referred to in Article 9 to order interim or pre - cautionary measures, on the application of a party to the arbitration, either before the arbitration proceed - ings begin or while they are ongoing, independently of the tribunal’s own power under Article 24. This court-ordered relief is particularly significant where the measure sought requires the coercive power of the state, such as attachment of assets or measures directed at third parties that are not bound by the arbi - tration agreement and therefore fall outside the tribu - nal’s own authority. Article 14 is not expressed to be limited to arbitrations seated in Oman, and an appli - cation for interim relief in support of an arbitration, including one seated outside Oman, is not generally treated as inconsistent with the parties’ agreement to arbitrate. The Arbitration Law does not contain a dedi - cated statutory regime addressing emergency arbitra - tors; the use of emergency arbitrator mechanisms in Oman-seated arbitrations is therefore a function of the institutional rules the parties have adopted rather than of the Arbitration Law itself, and enforcement of an emergency arbitrator’s decision may in practice still require recourse to the competent court under Article 14 or, by analogy, Article 24 (2). 6.3 Security for Costs The Arbitration Law does not contain a general, free - standing provision empowering the courts or an arbi - tral tribunal to order a claimant to provide security for the respondent’s costs of the arbitration as a whole. The closest statutory analogue is Article 24 (1), under which a tribunal, where the parties have so agreed, may require a party to which it has directed an interim or precautionary measure to provide adequate secu - rity to cover the costs of that specific measure – a
681 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook