The Tel Aviv District Court recently dismissed a summary procedure claim on the basis of forum non conveniens (ie, discretionary court power to dismiss a case where a more appropriate forum is available). The court ruled that the jurisdictional clauses found in the chain of agreements between the parties clearly pointed to alternative fora. Therefore, in the absence of any indication that the parties intended to grant jurisdiction to the Israeli courts, the court ruled that they were not the proper legal fora.
Israel's pro-arbitration position was recently affirmed by a district court decision refusing to grant injunctive relief that would have the effect of staying International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) arbitration even in the face of foreign insolvency proceedings. The Tel-Aviv District Court rejected a temporary injunction application to prevent an Israeli party from continuing arbitration with the ICC and ordered it to submit claims solely to the South Korean court overseeing the insolvency proceedings.
The Supreme Court recently refused to hear an appeal of a district court decision to enforce an International Chamber of Commerce award in Israel challenged on the grounds of public policy. The Supreme Court supported the district court's determination that a party's agreement to resolve a dispute in accordance with a contractual arbitral provision does not estop it from claiming that the dispute is not governed by the same contract, and that raising such a claim does not constitute bad faith.
The Supreme Court recently reaffirmed its position in favour of staying local proceedings to allow a foreign arbitration to proceed. The court rejected a request to appeal a stay issued by the district court based on a claim under the New York Convention. As a result, the court upheld recent Israeli jurisprudence, whereby the termination of a contract does not necessarily terminate the arbitration agreement contained therein.