Claimant Case Summary
I. The claims are admissible and submitted within the agreed time limit
The admissibility of Claimant's claim is contested by Respondent based on two presumptions:
First, since Claimant did not pay the registration fee in full and Mr. Fasttrack’s power of attorney was granted by wright holding instead of wright ltd., the request for arbitration filed by Claimant on 31 May 2016 was not complying with the requirements of article 4.1 the CAM-CCBC rules. Second, Claimant's initiation to the arbitration has occurred six days after the expiration of the agreed sixty-days’ time limit, as according to the arbitration clause, the last day parties could initiate to arbitration was 31 May 2016, and amended and valid request for arbitration was submitted
on 07 June 2016.
The admissibility of Claimant's claim is contested by Respondent based on two presumptions:
First, since Claimant did not pay the registration fee in full and Mr. Fasttrack’s power of attorney was granted by wright holding instead of wright ltd., the request for arbitration filed by Claimant on 31 May 2016 was not complying with the requirements of article 4.1 the CAM-CCBC rules. Second, Claimant's initiation to the arbitration has occurred six days after the expiration of the agreed sixty-days’ time limit, as according to the arbitration clause, the last day parties could initiate to arbitration was 31 May 2016, and amended and valid request for arbitration was submitted
on 07 June 2016.