...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Civil Engineering >Subcontractor Forces Arbitration under 'Equitable Estoppel'
【24h】

Subcontractor Forces Arbitration under 'Equitable Estoppel'

机译：分包商根据“平等禁止反言”进行仲裁

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Throughout the construction industry, parties typically choose to include arbitration clauses in their contracts as a means of resolving potential disputes. Arbitration is considered the preferable method for dispute resolution because it offers a seemingly shorter dispute process than protracted litigation and calls upon the services of a neutral decision maker who has knowledge of and experience in the construction industry. When contracting parties disagree over whether an arbitration provision should govern their dispute, either party may seek court intervention to compel arbitration. An interesting scenario arises, however, when an outsider seeks to compel arbitration. The recent legal trend is to allow these "nonsignatories" to compel arbitration on the basis of a number of theories, including "equitable estoppel." Consider, for example, the decision in Cappadonna Electrical Management v. Cameron County.
机译：在整个建筑行业中，当事方通常选择在其合同中加入仲裁条款，以解决潜在的纠纷。仲裁被认为是解决争端的首选方法，因为与长期诉讼相比，仲裁提供的看似短的程序，并且需要具有建筑行业知识和经验的中立决策者的服务。当缔约双方就仲裁规定是否应解决其争端存在分歧时，任何一方均可寻求法院干预以强迫进行仲裁。但是，当局外人寻求强制仲裁时，就会出现一个有趣的情况。最近的法律趋势是允许这些“非签署方”根据包括“平等的禁止反言”在内的多种理论来强制仲裁。例如，考虑Cappadonna Electrical Management诉Cameron County案中的判决。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号