The court discusses whether the definition of what constitutes an “arbitration agreement in writing” in the sense of the Convention is an internationally uniform rule prevailing over domestic law, and whether this uniform rule sets a maximum or a minimum requirement for the formal validity of the arbitration agreement.

The court discusses how to interpret the Convention’s requirement that the agreement is not null and void etc., as well as specific cases of invalidity: e.g., lack of consent (misrepresentation, duress, or fraud), vague wording of the arbitral clause; other terms of the contract contradict the intention to arbitrate, etc.

The court discusses which law – lex fori, lex contractus, law of the State where the award will be made – applies specifically to determining whether an agreement to arbitrate is “null and void etc.“, and, by extension, which law applies to determining the validity of arbitration agreements.