The Court enforced a GTA arbitral award, holding that an 'Other Terms' clause in a purchase contract incorporating GTA Trade Rules and Dispute Resolution Rules constituted a valid written arbitration agreement, and that a separate but related Exclusivity Agreement containing a general dispute resolution clause referring to 'mediation, arbitration etc.' was, when construed in context with the contemporaneously negotiated purchase contract, also subject to the same arbitration agreement. The Court confirmed that the doctrine of separability means alleged misleading or deceptive conduct inducing entry into the main contract does not impeach the arbitration agreement unless the conduct is specifically directed at the arbitration agreement itself, and that an arbitral panel's decision to invite further evidence from both parties under its procedural rules did not constitute a denial of natural justice or apprehended bias. The Court left open whether certification of an award by a plaintiff's CEO (as opposed to a solicitor) would satisfy s 9(2)(b) of the International Arbitration Act 1974 (Cth) in ex parte proceedings.
The full text is available to signed-in members.