This article assesses the compatibility of unilateral option clauses with the ECHR. It distinguishes between the two types of such agreements: unilateral arbitration and unilateral litigation clauses. Unilateral arbitration agreements establish litigation as a default rule with an arbitration exception exercisable exclusively by a designated party (the beneficiary). Unilateral litigation clauses provide for arbitration as the default dispute resolution mechanism, but one party (the beneficiary) can choose litigation. The article argues that these clauses affect the safeguards of Article 6 ECHR differently. More specifically, I submit that unilateral litigation clauses entail a waiver of both the right of access to a court and the right of equal access to a court by the nonbeneficiary, whereas unilateral arbitration agreements result in a waiver by the nonbeneficiary only of the right of equal access to a court. The article further analyses unilateral option clauses in light of the requirements for a valid waiver of a right developed by the ECtHR. The paper concludes that these clauses are compatible with the ECHR because they constitute a valid waiver of the right of equal access to a court.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.