A Greater Role For Australian Courts In Foreign Arbitral Proceedings?

In the recent decision of Samsung C&T Corporation v Duro Felguera Australia Pty Ltd,¹ the Supreme Court of Western Australia declined to make a declaration as to the effect of an arbitration agreement, instead granting a stay in favour of arbitration.

The Court confirmed that arbitration and jurisdiction agreements should be interpreted in a commercially pragmatic manner, taking account of the risk of fragmentation of proceedings. However, while the Court did not grant the declaration sought by Samsung, it said that it had jurisdiction to do so outside the framework of the Model Law. This reflects a relatively wide view of the Court's role in international commercial arbitration, which in practical terms may mean a narrower role for both arbitral tribunals and for the courts at the arbitral seat.