S IXTEENTH A NNUAL
W ILLEM C.V IS I NTERNATIONAL C OMMERCIAL A RBITRATION M OOT
3 to 9 A PRIL 2009
MEMORANDUM FOR RESPONDENT
STOCKHOLMS UNIVERSITET
O N B EHALF O F: A GAINST: Universal Auto Manufacturers, S.A. Reliable Auto Imports
47 Industrial Road 114 Outer Ring Road
Oceanside, Equatoriana Fortune City, Mediterraneo RESPONDENT CLAIMANT
S TEPHANIE C ABRAL ·J ESSICA E DVALL ·K SENIYA K ORYUKALOVA L AURE M EYER · S OFIA P ALMQVIST · J ONATHAN R OBILOTTO
T ABLE OF C ONTENTS
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES ...................................................................................................................... v INDEX OF CASES ....................................................................................................................................... x i INDEX OF ARBITRAL AWARDS ........................................................................................................ x vi INDEX OF LEGAL SOURCES ........................................................................................................... x viii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................................................... x x
STATEMENT OF FACTS .......................................................................................................................... 1 ARGUMENT .................................................................................................................................................. .3 I. RESPONDENT UNIVERSAL IS NOT BOUND BY THE ARBITRATION
AGREEMENT BECAUSE IT HAS NOT CONSENTED TO BEING PARTY TO
THESE PROCEEDINGS (3)
A. RESPONDENT U NIVERSAL H AS N EVER C ONSENTED TO B EING A P ARTY TO
T HESE A RBITRAL P ROCEEDINGS AND ITS O FFER TO P ROVIDE A SSISTANCE TO
CLAIMANT IS N OT S UFFICIENT G ROUNDS TO B IND RESPONDENT
U NIVERSAL TO THE A RBITRATION A GREEMENT (3)
1.
RESPONDENT Universal Did Not Participate in the Negotiation of the Contract, Nor its Performance .............................................................................. 4 2. RESPONDENT Universal‟s Offer to Assist CLAIMANT is Not a
Reasonable Basis to Force RESPONDENT Universal to Arbitrate a Dispute
Arising Out of a Contract It Never Signed (5)
3.
RESPONDENT Universal Was Not a Third-Party Beneficiary of the Contract ...................................................................................................................... 6 B.
RESPONDENT U NIVERSAL AND RESPONDENT UAM ARE T WO S EPARATE E NTITIES T HAT D O N OT C ONSTITUTE O NE E CONOMIC R EALITY ....................... 8 C. A PPLICATION OF THE T HEORIES OF “E QUITY AND G OOD A DMINISTRATION OF
J USTICE ” IS U NJUSTIFIED IN T HIS C ASE AS T HERE HAS B EEN N O D ENIAL OF
J USTICE OR O THER U NFAIR P REJUDICE TO CLAIMANT’S R IGHTS (9)
II. THE INSOLVENCY LAW OF OCEANIA RENDERED VOID THE
ARBITRATION CLAUSE AND CONSEQUENTLY THE ARBITRAL
TRIBUNAL DOES NOT HAVE JURISDICTION OVER THE PARTIES (9)
A. T HE I NSOLVENCY L AW OF O CEANIA IS A PPLICABLE TO THE M ATTER B EFORE
THE T RIBUNAL AND R ENDERS V OID THE F OUNDATION FOR T HESE
P ROCEEDINGS (10)
1. The Substantive Law Applicable to the Contract Should Also be Applicable
to the Arbitration Agreement (10)
2. Oceania Law is Applicable in This Dispute as the Law Most Cloly
Connected to the Contract (12)
3. The Tribunal Lacks Jurisdiction Over the Parties Becau the Oceania
Insolvency Law Operates to Render Void the Arbitration Agreement (14)
B. T HE E XPRESSED P UBLIC P OLICY C ONCERNS OF MEDITERRANEO AND
E QUATORIANA E NCOURAGE THE D ISMISSAL OF T HESE P ROCEEDINGS (15)
III. RESPONDENT UNIVERSAL CANNOT BE HELD LIABLE FOR RESPONDENT UAM’S BRE ACH OF CONTRACT (17)
A. RESPONDENT U NIVERSAL C ANNOT B E HELD L IABLE B ECAUSE N O A GENCY
R ELATIONSHIP E XISTED B ETWEEN RESPONDENT U NIVERSAL AND
RESPONDENT UAM (17)
1. RESPONDENT Universal Did Not Have Control Over RESPONDENT
UAM Sufficient to Support a Finding of Liability Bad on Agency
Principles (18)
2. RESPONDENT Universal Did Not Connt to Be Reprented by
RESPONDENT UAM in its Dealings With CLAIMANT (19)
3. RESPONDENT Universal Did Not Give the Appearance That
RESPONDENT UAM Had Authority to Act on its Behalf (21)
B. “P IERCING THE C ORPORATE V EIL” OF RESPONDENT U NIVERSAL IS
U NWARRANTED IN L IGHT OF THE L ACK OF E VIDENCE OF I MPROPER
C ONDUCT (22)
IV. CLAIMANT WAS NOT ENTITLED TO DECLARE THE CONTRACT AVOIDED (25)
A. CLAIMANT W AS N OT E NTITLED TO A VOID THE C ONTRACT B ECAUSE THE
A LLEGED
B REACH W AS N OT F UNDAMENTAL AND CLAIMANT D ID N OT
H AVE G OOD G ROUNDS TO C ONCLUDE THAT A F UNDAMENTAL B REACH
W OULD O CCUR IN THE F UTURE (26)
1. The Tera Cars Sales Contract Was an Installment Sales Contract (26)
2. The First Installment Was Not Fundamentally Breached (27)
i. The Breach Did Not Substantially Deprive CLAIMANT of Its
Expectation Under the Contract (27)
ii. No Substantial Deprivation Was Foreeable (30)
3. CLAIMANT Did Not Have Good Grounds to Believe a Fundamental
Breach Would Occur in the Future (31)
B. CLAIMANT D ECLARED THE C ONTRACT A VOIDED B EFORE THE T IME F IXED
FOR P ERFORMANCE H AD E XPIRED (33)
C. E VEN IF THE C ONTRACT W AS N OT AN I NSTALLMENT C ONTRACT,CLAIMANT
W AS S TILL N OT E NTITLED TO D ECLARE THE C ONTRACT A VOIDED (34)
V. REQUEST FOR RELIEF (35)
I NDEX OF A UTHORITIES
A ZEREDO DA S ILVEIRA, Anticipatory Breach under the United Nations Convention on Mercédeh
Contracts for the International Sale of Goods
Nordic Journal of Commercial Law, Issue 2005 #2
Available at:
www.cisg.law.pace.edu/cisg/biblio/azeredo.html#iv
Cited as: A ZEREDO
(Paras.60, 79)
B ABIAK, Andrew Defining “Fundamental Breach” Under the United Nations
Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods. 6
Temple International and Comparative Law Journal (1992) 113-143
Available at: www.cisg.law.pace.edu/cisg/biblio/babiak.html
Cited as: B ABIAK
(Paras.72)
B ENNETT,Trevor Article 71. In: Cesare Bianca and Michael Bonell, Eds. Commentary
on the International Sales Law, Giuffrè: Milan (1987) 513-524.
Available at: www.cisg.law.pace.edu/cisg/biblio/bennett-
bb71.html
Cited as: B ENNETT (71) IN B IANCA/B ONELL
(Para. 80)
B ENNETT,Trevor Article 73. In: Cesare Bianca and Michael Bonell, Eds. Commentary
on the International Sales Law, Giuffrè: Milan (1987) 531-537.
Available at: www.cisg.law.pace.edu/cisg/biblio/bennett-
bb73.html#ii
Cited as: B ENNETT (73) IN B IANCA/B ONELL
(Paras.74, 75)
B IANCA, Cesare Commentary on the International Sales Law: The 1980 Vienna Sales B ONELL, Michael Joachim Convention. Giuffre, Milan, 1987
(Eds.) Cited as: B IANCA /B ONELL
(Para. 63)
B LACK Black‟s Law Dictionary, Special Deluxe 5th Edition
West Publishing, 1979
Cited as: B LACK‟S L AW
(Paras. 31)
B LESSING,Marc Introduction to Arbitration: Swiss and International Perspectives. In:
Swiss Commercial Law Series, Vol. 10; Munich, Helbing &
Lichtenhahn, 1999.
Cited as: B LESSING
(Paras. 25, 26)
