GERMANY 169 The case concerned the sale of allegedly contaminated mace flowers by a Dutch company to a German company.
I. The Court held that reference to general terms and conditions containing an arbitration clause in an order confirmation signed by one party does not amount to an 'agreement in writing' for purposes of Article II of the New York Convention. Since reference to the terms and conditions was made for the first time in the order confirmation, signature from the other party (i.e., the Claimant) would have been required as well.
II. The Court further held that the arbitration clause could not be enforced pursuant to the more-favorable-right provision in Article VII of the Convention either.
The Court found that the requirements of Section 1031 of the Zivilprozessordnung (ZPO) were not met.
- While the confirmation order constituted a document transmitted by one party to the other for purposes of Section 1031(2) of the ZPO which refers to an arbitration clause in accordance with Section 1031(3) of the ZPO, the Court found that such reference did not validly incorporate the arbitration clause into the contract.
- The Court determined the question of whether the clause was validly incorporated into the contract according to substantive law, i.e., German law including the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG). Since the contract concerned the sale of goods between parties with their respective seats in Germany and the Netherlands, the Court considered the CISG generally applicable. Relying on Article 8 of the CISG, the Court found that the arbitration clause had not been validly incorporated.
The Court further held that the arbitration clause would also be invalid under the conflict of law provisions of German law. Notably, the Court held that pursuant to Article 11(2) of the Einführungsgesetz zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuche (EGBGB) the law applicable to the arbitration agreement should be determined on the basis of (and in analogy to) Article V(1)(a) of the New York Convention. Applying Article V(1)(a) of the Convention would render Dutch law including the CISG applicable, according to which, as the Court had already determined, the arbitration clause was not validly incorporated into the contract.
Bundesgerichtshof, 26 November 2020 – I ZR 245/19
(Not indicated v. P. V. & Z.)