The Court granted the defendant's motion to compel arbitration. Applying Montana law principles of contract interpretation, the Court found that the policy between the parties contained a valid arbitration clause and that the service-of-suit provision also contained in the policy worked in concert, not in conflict-with the arbitration provision. Further, the four jurisdictional requirements for compelling arbitration under the New York Convention – that there is an agreement in writing within the meaning of the Convention; the agreement provides for arbitration in the territory of a Convention signatory; the agreement arises out of a legal relationship, whether contractual or not, which is considered commercial; and a party to the agreement is not an American citizen, or the commercial relationship has some reasonable relation with one or more foreign states – were met.