THE ARBITRATION AGREEMENT UNDER UZBEK LAW: CONSENT, FORM, AND THE LIMITS OF PARTY AUTONOMY

Abstract

The arbitration agreement is the cornerstone of any arbitral process: without a valid, binding agreement to arbitrate, tribunals lack jurisdiction and awards are vulnerable to challenge. This article examines the legal regime governing arbitration agreements under Uzbek law, with particular attention to the dual statutory framework created by the Law on International Commercial Arbitration (ICA Law, 2021) and the Domestic Arbitration Law (DAL, 2006). Adopting the UNCITRAL Model Law as its template, Uzbekistan has positioned itself within the mainstream of international arbitration law — yet significant interpretive gaps remain. The article analyzes the essential content and form requirements for arbitration agreements, evaluating Uzbekistan's compliance with Article II(2) of the New York Convention and the 2006 UNCITRAL Recommendation on the written-form requirement. It examines the under-developed doctrine of incorporation by reference through practical hypotheticals involving ICC and FIDIC standard forms, and undertakes a comparative analysis of the law applicable to the arbitration agreement, drawing on the Sulamérica and Enka v. Chubb jurisprudence. The article further expands on the implications of the reported MADI GMBH v. Zomin Brewery decision for multi-party and third-party arbitration, exploring the group-of-companies doctrine and assignment. A new section addresses pathological arbitration clauses – a systemic risk in Uzbek commercial practice – and argues for adoption of a pro-validity construction principle. Throughout, the article compares Uzbek law with French, German, English, and other Model Law jurisdictions, identifying areas where Uzbek courts and legislators should update or clarify the existing framework.