CYIL vol. 12 (2021)

Kateřina zabloudilovÁ CYIL 12 (2021) of the arbitration agreement contained therein; and that the main contract and the arbitration agreement may be governed by different laws. 25 Next, the NY Convention adopts a principle of universality under which arbitration agreements providing for arbitration in both contracting and non-contracting states must be enforced and recognized alike. 26 Thus, in contracting states, the NY Convention also applies to arbitration agreements providing for arbitration in non-contracting states. 27 Finally, the NY Convention stipulates that for arbitration agreements to be valid, the subject matter must be arbitrable (i.e., capable of final and binding settlement by arbitration). 28 The NY Convention itself does not define which disputes are arbitrable – it must be assessed by national law. 29 The Brussels Ibis Regulation Jurisdiction agreements under the Brussels Ibis Regulation are defined as arrangements of the parties that a court or the courts of a member state are to have jurisdiction to settle any disputes which have arisen or which may arise in connection with a particular legal relationship.” 30 Jurisdiction agreements enable parties to agree freely which court or courts of the EU Member States shall have jurisdiction over the dispute arising between them. 31 The dispute covered by jurisdiction agreements may be an existing or a future one. 32 Furthermore, jurisdiction agreements must relate to a particular legal relationship, contractual or tortious. 33 Regarding the exclusivity of jurisdiction agreements, exclusive jurisdiction agreements 34 confer jurisdiction onto the chosen court or courts to the exclusion of all other courts 25 Born, B. G. (op. cit. sub 1), p. 834; see also International Council for Commercial Arbitration. (op. cit. sub 14), p. 40; see also Kronke, H. (op. cit. sub 16), p. 51. 26 UNCITRAL. UNCITRAL Secretariat Guide on the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (New York, 1958). (op. cit. sub 15), pp. 39, 40. 27 This information is, however, not entirely relevant due to significant amount of contracting states (168). UNCITRAL. Status: Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (New York, 1958) (the „New York Convention“). [online]. uncitral.org . 1985. [cit. 30. 12. 2020], available at: https:// uncitral.un.org/en/texts/arbitration/conventions/foreign_arbitral_awards/status2. 28 Kronke, H. (op. cit. sub 16), p. 68; see also Růžička, K. (op. cit. sub 1), p. 15. 29 Bělohláv , J. A. Arbitration: Principles & particularities (op. cit. sub 1), p. 33; see also Kronke, H. (op. cit. sub 16), p. 68. 30 Art. 25(1) of the Brussels Ibis Regulation. 31 Magnus, U., Mankowski, P. (op. cit. sub 3), p. 591. 32 Hartley, C. T. Choice-of-court agreements under the European and international instruments: the revised Brussels I Regulation, the Lugano Convention, and the Hague Convention . Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013, pp. 173, 174; see also Magnus, U., Mankowski, P. (op. cit. sub 3), pp. 620, 621. 33 In literature Kyselovská, T., Rozehnalová, N. Rozhodování Soudního dvora EU ve věcech příslušnosti: (analýza rozhodnutí dle nařízení Brusel Ibis). [ EU Court‘s decision making in matters of jurisdiction: (analysis of decisions under Brussels Ibis ).] Brno: Masarykova univerzita, 2014, p. 421; see also Magnus, U., Mankowski, P. (op. cit. sub 3), pp. 619-621; see also Hartley, C. T. (op. cit. sub 31), p. 142. In case law Powell Duffryn pic and Wolfgang Petereit , ECJ C-214/89, judgment of 10 March 1992. 34 Thus, a jurisdiction agreement that nominates one court exclusively for each party, excluding all the otherwise competent courts for each party and obliging each party to litigate in its nominated court is not an exclusive one unless the courts are located in one member state. The same applies to a jurisdiction agreement that nominates two or more courts of more member states as having exclusive jurisdiction for both parties, source: Keyes, M. Brook, A. M. (op. cit. sub 5), p . 356.

402