Oil Basins v Esso Australia Resources

[2026] VSCA 6

Victorian Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Commercial Arbitration
2. › International commercial arbitration
3. › Stay of court proceedings
4. › Jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal
5. › Whether court required to determine construction of arbitration agreement on stay application
6. › Light touch approach
7. › Competence principle (Kompetenz-Kompetenz)
8. › International Arbitration Act 1974 (Cth), s 7(2)
9. › UNCITRAL Model Law, art 16
1. Commercial Arbitration
2. › International commercial arbitration
3. › Competence principle
4. › Whether parties can exclude operation of art 16(1) of Model Law by agreement
5. › Whether dispute about scope of arbitration agreement capable of settlement by arbitration
6. › Whether 'matter' in s 7(2)(b) includes scope disputes
7. › International Arbitration Act 1974 (Cth), ss 7(2), 16, 21
8. › UNCITRAL Model Law, arts 5, 8, 16
1. Commercial Arbitration
2. › International commercial arbitration
3. › Proper law of arbitration agreement
4. › Choice of law clause applying foreign law to interpretation and application of agreement
5. › Whether choice of New York law governed arbitration agreement or only substantive rights
6. › Curial law
7. › Seat of arbitration
8. › International Arbitration Act 1974 (Cth), s 16
9. › UNCITRAL Model Law, art 28
1. Commercial Arbitration
2. › International commercial arbitration
3. › Whether arbitration agreement inoperative
4. › Section 7(5) of International Arbitration Act 1974 (Cth)
5. › Whether question of inoperativeness properly left to arbitral tribunal
6. › Legal and factual complexity

Quick Take

Parties cannot contract out of the competence principle under article 16(1) of the Model Law, even by choosing a foreign law that would allocate scope questions to courts; disputes about the scope of an arbitration agreement remain capable of settlement by arbitration for the purposes of section 7(2)(b) of the IAA.