Interpreting Dispute Resolution Clauses

DOI

10.2991/iclick-18.2019.72How to use a DOI?

Keywords

ADR; arbitration; litigation

Abstract

In Indonesia, courts have ruled that the presence of an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) clause denies them jurisdiction to rule on issues arising from the contract, even if the ADR clause only purports to cover particular disputes or terms and the issue before the court falls outside of the ADR clause. To explore and analyse why this is the case, the laws surrounding such clauses, especially arbitration clauses, will be analysed in the Indonesian context and then compared to the approach of other nations. The cases of Banker Trust Company & Banker Trust International v PT. Mayora Indah, Tbk, and PT Buahan v PT Bali Leisure will be used as case study for the Indonesian approach. It will be demonstrated that the absolute coverage that Indonesian courts believe ADR clauses have leads to problems where causes of action fail to be dealt with by either ADR or by litigation.

Copyright

© 2019, the Authors. Published by Atlantis Press.

Open Access

This is an open access article distributed under the CC BY-NC license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/).

Download article (PDF)

TY  - CONF
AU  - Putu Tuni Cakabawa Landra
AU  - Ni Putu Cherry Saraswati
AU  - Lang Palmer Williamson
PY  - 2019/07
DA  - 2019/07
TI  - Interpreting Dispute Resolution Clauses
BT  - Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Life, Innovation, Change and Knowledge (ICLICK 2018)
PB  - Atlantis Press
SP  - 343
EP  - 347
SN  - 2352-5398
UR  - https://doi.org/10.2991/iclick-18.2019.72
DO  - 10.2991/iclick-18.2019.72
ID  - CakabawaLandra2019/07
ER  -