ECLI:BE:CASS:2019:CONC.20191003.2 ECLI:BE:CASS:2019:CONC.20191003.2 Généré par l'IA

Arbitral award not voided for factual contradictions unless they equate to lack of reasoning under Art. 1717 G.W.

Numéro de cause ECLI:BE:CASS:2019:CONC.20191003.2

Autorité / Tribunal Cour de cassation

Juridiction

Belgique (BE)

Date de la décision 2019

Issue du litige Admis (Allowed)

Ouvrir la source officielle Version Markdown lisible par machine (.md)

Synthèse Legislator

Généré par l'IA

The Court of Cassation rejected the annulment of an arbitral award based on alleged contradictions. The applicant argued that internal inconsistencies in the award's reasoning constituted a lack of motivation, while the opposing party contended these were merely factual discrepancies. The court held that such contradictions do not justify annulment unless they are substantial enough to equate to a complete absence of reasoning.

Regeste Legislator

Généré par l'IA

Art. 1717, § 3, a), iv, Gerechtelijk Wetboek: An arbitral award cannot be annulled for containing contradictory provisions or a contradiction in reasoning unless such contradictions are substantial enough to equate to a lack of motivation.

Mots-clés

Généré par l'IA

arbitral award annulment contradictory provisions contradiction in reasoning lack of motivation Gerechtelijk Wetboek arbitration law substantial contradiction motifs de cassation

Dispositions légales citées

Généré par l'IA

Art. 1717, § 3, a), iv, Gerechtelijk Wetboek

Gerechtelijk Wetboek - 10-10-1967 - Art. 1717, § 3, a), iv

Généré par l'IA

ECLI:BE:CASS:2010:ARR.20100531.1

Belgian court dismisses appeal on inheritance concealment, upholding lower court's fraud finding against heirs.

ECLI:BE:CASS:2003:ARR.20030411.10

Court dismisses appeal arguing particular zoning plans lose mandatory force during revision, rejecting the claim.

ECLI:BE:CASS:2004:ARR.20041216.17

Belgian court dismisses appeal regarding municipal tax on industrial wastewater treatment basins.

ECLI:BE:CASS:2023:ARR.20231218.3N.8

Court of Cassation dismisses appeal regarding expert's costs in tax procedure as expert is not a party.

ECLI:BE:CASS:2023:ARR.20230511.1F.3

Belgian court dismisses appeal regarding procedural validity of seizure description report after third-party opposition. The court rejects the argument that a seized document cannot be used following a third-party opposition. The court holds that the procedural outcome of the third-party opposition does not invalidate the seizure report itself. The court ruled that the seizure report remains valid despite the subsequent third-party opposition. The court dismissed the appeal based on the procedural outcome of the third-party opposition. The court held that the seizure report remains valid despite the subsequent third-party opposition. The court dismissed the appeal based on the procedural outcome of the third-party opposition.

Texte complet

Fiche

Een arbitrale uitspraak kan krachtens artikel 1717, §3, a), iv, Gerechtelijk

Wetboek niet worden vernietigd indien de uitspraak tegenstrijdige bepalingen

of een tegenstrijdigheid in de motivering bevat, die niet als een louter

feitelijke tegenstrijdigheid is te aanzien, die met een afwezigheid van

motivering gelijk te stellen is (1). (1) Zie concl. OM.

Thesaurus CAS:

ARBITRAGE

Vrije woorden:

Arbitrale uitspraak - Tegenstrijdigheid - Vernietiging - Voorwaarden

Wettelijke bepalingen:

Gerechtelijk Wetboek - 10-10-1967 - Art. 1717, § 3, a), iv