II. The recommended arbitration agreement for inclusion in the contract of the participants, which is not a founding document (for example.B. in the company agreement): Dr. Ziya Akinci is the founding partner of AKINCI Law Oices, Turkey. He sits as an arbitrator in disputes under the ICC and other institute rules, including the ITO and TRAC, as well as the ad hoc rules. Dr. Akinci acts as an advisor to the party in national and international arbitration proceedings, as well as under ICC rules, icN and ad hoc rules. He has already been asked in some arbitration proceedings to make expert opinions. Dr. Akinci is a member of the ICC Court. Many national laws have recognized that the invalidity, non-existence, illegality or termination of the substantive contract does not affect the validity, legality or existence of the arbitration agreement.
Accordingly, arbitrators have the prerogative to consider all disputes related to the existence, validity, legality or termination of the main contract, since such disputes do not affect the arbitration agreement itself. Nevertheless, the problem can be solved by putting into practice the methods used in other legal systems to terminate the arbitration agreement. It should be noted that these methods, while validly used in other jurisdictions, may not be of the same level of validity in Bangladesh. If the limitation period for a defendant`s counterclaim (which has yet to be brought in the closed proceedings) expires shortly after such termination, the respondent should immediately commence arbitration proceedings for its counterclaim under the arbitration agreement, by filing a new statement of arbitration with the claimant. The objective is to avoid that the counter-claim by the statutory limitation period provided for in the Limitation Rules (Cap. 347), which applies to arbitration proceedings under Article 14 of the Arbitration Rules (Chap. 609). 3 Before taking a decision to annul the Court, the Court must be fully satisfied that the parties have in fact reached an agreement which settles definitively and definitively all outstanding issues between the parties. Such an injunction has no definitive effect. In the event of cancellation of the settlement, an claimant may re-file his claim with a newly appointed arbitral tribunal. “`I don`t want to assert my claims against the defendant` is not the same as `I refuse to fulfill my obligation to submit the claim to arbitration.` The applicant may, of course, effectively waive his right to recover what he originally claimed, and such a waiver can be inferred from both conduct and words.
However, it does not have arbitration. In the ad hoc arbitration proceedings BP Exploration Company (Libya) Ltd. v. Libya, the sole arbitrator, implicitly referred to the doctrine of severability and found that “[Libyan law] was effective in termating BP`s concession, except in the sense that BP`s concession forms the basis of the tribunal`s jurisdiction and the applicant`s right to claim damages from the defendant in court.  Unless otherwise agreed between the parties, an arbitration agreement that is or is to be part of another agreement (written or not) is not considered invalid, non-existent or inoperative, because that other agreement is invalid, has not been entered into or has become inoperative, and it is treated for this purpose as an agreement in its own right. . . .