Question 1
In 2009, Catalan Co and Tiptoi BV entered into a long-term distribution agreement. They
enjoyed a fruitful cooperation for a number of years until Catalan encountered difficulties in
its distribution processes and was unable to perform its obligations in accordance with the
terms of the contract. Attempts to resolve their difficulties through discussions were
unsuccessful and the dispute escalated. The agreement between the parties contains the
following clause:
“In the event of any dispute in relation to this contract, parties will resort to mediation in
accordance with the procedures of the London Mediation Institute before initiating litigation.”
Tiptoi initiates legal proceedings before the High Court in London claiming Catalan has
breached the distribution agreement. Catalan challenges the jurisdiction of the court on the
basis of the agreement to mediate contained in the contract.
(a) Advise Catalan on the enforceability of the agreement to mediate. 6 pts
Assume that Tiptoi and Catalan have entered into mediation, however, Catalan anticipates
that the mediation will not be successful. In order to protect itself during the legal proceedings
that will likely follow, Catalan introduces in the mediation proceedings information that could
be used against it.
(b) Explain to what extent, if at all, Tiptoi may admit such information from the mediation
proceedings in the subsequent legal proceedings. 4 pts
Question 2
In 2009 a franchise agreement was concluded between SwiftWatch US, a luxury watch
producer residing in Chicago, Illinois (US) and G-Watch Germany. The agreement allows G-
Watch Germany to manufacture and sell watches with the text ‘SwiftWatch US’ by G-Watch
Germany.
The agreement between the parties inter alia provides for the following provision:
‘All disputes arising from the relationship SwiftWatch US and G-Watch Germany shall be
settled by the Netherlands Arbitration Institute (NAI) in The Hague (Netherlands), and the
applicable law shall be designated by the NAI in accordance with the law of the Netherlands.
The franchise agreement shall expire eight years after the date of conclusion of the contract.’
In April 2017 G-Watch Germany preferring alliances with other industrial partners terminates
the contractual relationship with SwiftWatch US, ‘the franchise agreement being expired’.
SwiftWatch US however summons G-Watch Germany in court proceedings in Chicago,
Illinois, claiming compensation for premature and therefore unlawful breach of their
contractual relationship which allegedly was concluded December 28, 2009, thus not yet
expired.
In 2009, Catalan Co and Tiptoi BV entered into a long-term distribution agreement. They
enjoyed a fruitful cooperation for a number of years until Catalan encountered difficulties in
its distribution processes and was unable to perform its obligations in accordance with the
terms of the contract. Attempts to resolve their difficulties through discussions were
unsuccessful and the dispute escalated. The agreement between the parties contains the
following clause:
“In the event of any dispute in relation to this contract, parties will resort to mediation in
accordance with the procedures of the London Mediation Institute before initiating litigation.”
Tiptoi initiates legal proceedings before the High Court in London claiming Catalan has
breached the distribution agreement. Catalan challenges the jurisdiction of the court on the
basis of the agreement to mediate contained in the contract.
(a) Advise Catalan on the enforceability of the agreement to mediate. 6 pts
Assume that Tiptoi and Catalan have entered into mediation, however, Catalan anticipates
that the mediation will not be successful. In order to protect itself during the legal proceedings
that will likely follow, Catalan introduces in the mediation proceedings information that could
be used against it.
(b) Explain to what extent, if at all, Tiptoi may admit such information from the mediation
proceedings in the subsequent legal proceedings. 4 pts
Question 2
In 2009 a franchise agreement was concluded between SwiftWatch US, a luxury watch
producer residing in Chicago, Illinois (US) and G-Watch Germany. The agreement allows G-
Watch Germany to manufacture and sell watches with the text ‘SwiftWatch US’ by G-Watch
Germany.
The agreement between the parties inter alia provides for the following provision:
‘All disputes arising from the relationship SwiftWatch US and G-Watch Germany shall be
settled by the Netherlands Arbitration Institute (NAI) in The Hague (Netherlands), and the
applicable law shall be designated by the NAI in accordance with the law of the Netherlands.
The franchise agreement shall expire eight years after the date of conclusion of the contract.’
In April 2017 G-Watch Germany preferring alliances with other industrial partners terminates
the contractual relationship with SwiftWatch US, ‘the franchise agreement being expired’.
SwiftWatch US however summons G-Watch Germany in court proceedings in Chicago,
Illinois, claiming compensation for premature and therefore unlawful breach of their
contractual relationship which allegedly was concluded December 28, 2009, thus not yet
expired.
