Before anyone argues the merits, someone usually argues whether the tribunal has any business hearing the case. Jurisdictional issues control that gateway. We raise and defeat jurisdictional challenges in arbitration, covering arbitration agreement validity, the scope of arbitrable disputes, party consent, and the tribunal's authority to rule on its own jurisdiction under the competence-competence principle.
Validity Of The Agreement
A valid arbitration agreement is the foundation of the tribunal's power, so it is the first thing a respondent attacks. We establish that an enforceable agreement exists and we challenge agreements tainted by formation defects, lack of capacity, fraud, or duress. We apply the separability doctrine, which treats the arbitration clause as independent of the main contract, so a dispute about the contract does not automatically dissolve the duty to arbitrate.
Scope And Arbitrability
Even with a valid clause, not every claim falls within it, and some subjects are simply off-limits to arbitration as a matter of public policy. We argue both edges of scope, whether a particular claim was meant to be arbitrated and whether the subject matter is arbitrable at all. We read clause language closely and tie our position to the parties' intent, because that is what tribunals and reviewing courts ultimately rely on.
Consent And Non-Signatories
Arbitration depends on consent, which gets complicated when corporate groups, assignees, or guarantors are involved. We pursue and resist claims that bind non-signatories under theories like agency, alter ego, estoppel, and group-of-companies. We also handle competence-competence timing, knowing when to press a jurisdictional objection before the tribunal and when to preserve it for the courts at the enforcement or set-aside stage.