Following a disagreement regarding the execution of a contract for the provision of eggs, the Arbitration and Mediation Centre of Brittany (Centre d’Arbitrage de Médiation de Bretagne) has been designated to organise the arbitration.

In parallel, Mr. G (“Appellant”) assigned its rights to NATURE OEUF.

Appellant’s voluntarily intervention in the ongoing arbitration procedure was not admitted by the Arbitration Centre.

Following this rejection, the Appellant summoned Respondent in order to obtain the designation of a new arbitrator, as the mission of the first arbitrator went on for more that the statutory 6-month delay. The tribunal raised its incompetence for another tribunal to rule on the issue.

Thus, the Appellant appealed the decision justifying that either the date of the designation or the date of acceptation by the arbitrator of its mission should be taken into account to calculate the delay and not the date of signature of the arbitration settlement.

Rennes Court of Appeal rejects the Appellant’s request. The Court states that the arbitrator’s nomination is neither fixed on the day of his nomination, nor on the day of acceptance of his mission, but on the day that the arbitrator has managed to identify the parties to the procedure and establish the issue arising from the dispute. In this case, the arbitration settlement permitted the identification, as it fixes the context of the dispute and the parties’ positions which were established a year and a half after the arbitrator’s nomination.

Furthermore, the Court recalls that a non-signatory party to the arbitration clause can neither see its request admissible, nor can it ask for the designation of a new arbitrator.

The Court confirms the decision of the tribunal.