33 Prior to the Arbitration Act of 1996, it was considered rare for the appropriate law of the arbitration agreement to be described by the explicit choice of substantive law. See Channel Tunnel Group Ltd v Balfour Beatty Construction Ltd; Sumitomo Heavy Industries Ltd v Oil and Natural Gas Commission, 57 (Potter J); Black Clawson International Ltd v Papierwerke Waldhof-Aschaffenburg AG  2 Lloyd`s Rep 446, 455. Following the Arbitration Act, see XL Insurance Ltd v Owens Corning; C v D; Shashoua and Others vs. Sharma  EWHC 957 (Comm); Abuja Hotels Ltd v Meridien SAS. In a recent case of the Commercial Court of England, Habas Sinai, an agent (contrary to the instructions of the principal), voted a contract without applicable legislation and an arbitration clause providing for icc arbitration in London. In the absence of an explicit provision of the applicable law in the substantive contract, the applicable law of the arbitration agreement would normally be that of the registered office, i.e. English law. It was argued that, in that case, the seat should be ignored because it had been agreed without real authority. The applicable law would then be the law most closely linked to the substantive contract, which would be Turkish law (which was the intention of the contracting authority). (b) The formal validity of an international arbitration convention shall be determined in accordance with the formal rules of validity of the arbitral law of the country in whose territory the arbitral tribunal sits. – whether a party was duly represented at the conclusion of the arbitration agreement subject to the law of the State in which the agent concluded the arbitration agreement The validity of an arbitration agreement may be examined by national courts where an opposition is invoked in favour of arbitration or as a ground for refusal of enforcement if enforcement is sought; or as a ground for annulment, if the award is sought to be set aside. 2 In the absence of a choice by the parties, the law of the seat of the arbitral tribunal plays a predominant role in determining the law applicable to the arbitration agreement. It resolves the following issues, three of which concern the validity of the arbitration agreement: the decision will also set the precedent for English courts to enforce an arbitration agreement (e.g.B.
suspend legal proceedings in the UK or abroad) or to grant an action for interim measures. The Supreme Court`s main proposal is the presumption that, if the law applicable to the arbitration agreement is not established, the choice of law applicable to the contract generally applies to an arbitration agreement that is part of the treaty. One of the reasons for the judgment is that, for entrepreneurs, it is normal to assume that if an arbitration agreement is part of a commercial contract, the choice of law in the contract that contains the arbitration agreement also applies to the arbitration agreement. . . .