One area in which the « presumption of a single point of contact » has been applied is the case of the conclusion of a dispute settlement agreement that has arisen on the other side of an earlier agreement between the same parties. A party then attempts to charge the settlement agreement and assert a right on the basis of the old contract. Of course, the parties were free to agree that the settlement agreement should be governed by different dispute settlement rules, but such an agreement should be explicitly registered and could not simply be inferred, unless the parties had explicitly raised the issue in their exchanges. In the case of payment of a settlement amount, the tax impact should be taken into account. For example, the parties may explicitly state that the amount of the statement is a VAT (VAT) statement. This is also an important reflection for parties established in the Gulf after the introduction of VAT in the United Arab Emirates and other Gulf countries. He is ready, like a touchline coach, to rush to the field to apply first aid in the form of common sense when it comes to interpreting and applying arbitration clauses. In Monde Petroleum SA v Westernzagros Ltd, a dispute was brought under an advisory contract which was subsequently resolved. The consulting contract provided for an arbitration procedure; the settlement agreement provided for the exclusive jurisdiction of the English courts. There was a dispute as to whether one of the parties was induced to enter into the settlement agreement by misrepresentation and whether the courts or an arbitral tribunal had jurisdiction to rule on the case.
It considered that it was inconceivable that the parties intended that in the event of non-payment of the agreed amount, the owner would not be able to assert his rights in arbitration proceedings, the court chosen by the parties. Instead, they should initiate legal proceedings, either in the national jurisdiction of the charterers or by seeking permission to serve English proceedings outside the jurisdiction. The owner was entitled to the costs of sleeping and heating. The claim was the subject of correspondence between the parties and was settled. The parties have not entered into a formal settlement agreement. On the contrary, the agreement to compromise the claims was documented in an exchange of emails in which the charterer agreed to pay $600,000 to the owner. It is also important to consider the extent to which rights may be conferred on third parties in a settlement agreement (e.g. .B. under the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 under English law or Section 252 of the Civil Code of the United Arab Emirates). When settled with one of the defendants or potential defendants, it is important to expressly reserve the right to assert claims against other or potential defendants. However, communication is not recognized in some legal systems (including the United Arab Emirates). Therefore, documents labelled « without prejudice », such as.B.
draft settlement agreements, may be submitted to the court or arbitration court and used subsequently in the absence of a settlement. Therefore, in the United Arab Emirates, it is customary to limit the documentation of transaction negotiations and to try to agree on a confidentiality agreement covering the exchange of information during transaction negotiations and to specify in each exchange that transaction offers are made without any guarantee. « Businessmen, in particular, are supposed to have made agreements to achieve a rational business goal, and an understanding of that goal will influence how their language is interpreted. » Males J agreed with the arbitrators that it was obvious that the parties intended to continue to apply the arbitration clause in the party to the charterer if the agreed amount was not paid. . . .