Singapore Law Watch Commentary: Agreement to Agree

Our case update on how an agreement to agree is not necessarily fatal to the enforcement of the agreement, has been picked up by Singapore Law Watch (“SLW“). Our SLW Commentary can be found here.

Our SLW Commentary examines the English Court of Appeal case of MRI Trading AG v Erdenet Mining Corporation LLC [2013] EWCA Civ 156 which unanimously upheld the decision of the High Court which had set aside an arbitration award on the basis that the tribunal had made an error of law with respect to the enforceability of certain clauses which appeared to be agreements to agree. This case is significant in light of the well-settled principle of law that a so-called agreement to agree between parties is void and unenforceable for uncertainty. Lord Ackner in the House of Lords’ decision in Walford and Others v Miles and Another [1992] 2 AC 128  observed (at 138) that “[t]he reason why…an agreement to agree, is unenforceable, is simply because it lacks the necessary certainty.”

About Shaun Lee

International Dispute Resolution and Arbitration lawyer. Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Arbitration. Panel of Arbitrators and Panelist for DNDR at the KLRCA.
This entry was posted in Singapore, UK and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s