The alternative Sample Clauses

The alternative. In conclusion and to answer the fourth and last research question, the thesis will briefly present the alternative way of resolving the issue in KKO 2013:84 in the light of the previous analysis. Chronologically following the research questions, the deduction begins by addressing the issue of requirement of written arbitration agreement, which, as a premise, would preclude arbitration with regard to the non-signatory if the letter of the law was interpreted accurately. However, as the argumentation above in Chapter 5.2.1 asserts, the previous strict interpretation of the written requirement is ill-suited to the modern business environment in which situations including non-signatory parties arise more and more 337 See supra Chapter 4.4.4. 338 See Article II (1) of the New York Convention. frequently. It lacks justification and has widely been replaced by freedom of the parties to decide on the form more freely. Furthermore, the more appropriate perception of the requirement would apply the strict requirement only to the initial creation of the arbitration agreement, not the subsequent determination of its ratione personae. Accordingly, after concluding that the letter of section 3 of the Finnish Arbitration Act does not create an obstacle, the deduction moves on to consider whether the signatories may validly set arbitration as a condition to the benefit they grant to the non-signatory. As stated in Chapter 5.3.2, the signatories do indeed have the right to place such conditions because, absent any restrictions by the law, it is essentially a question of freedom of contract concerning a unilateral stipulation by the signatories. The question of whether the non-signatory is bound is therefore determined by interpreting whether it was the signatories’ intention to bind him. The next step is to interpret the intent of both the signatories and the non-signatory. Discussed in Chapter 6.3.1, the interpretation, in addition to exploring the actual arbitration clause, relies heavily on presumptions and objective interpretation. The presumptions along with other considerations clearly support the intent of the signatories to bind the non- signatory. Therefore, in the absence of any proof whatsoever to the contrary, the signatories’ intent (as well as the aforementioned right to impose arbitration as an accessory) leads to the conclusion that the non-signatory is bound to arbitration.

The alternative. Table 5 Correlation (d) Correlation between Age and promise to work enthusiastically on jobs which others would prefer not to do Age Promise to work enthusiastically on jobs which others would prefer not to do Age Xxxxxxx Correlation Co-efficient (r) 1 0.0183* Sig. (2-tailed) 0.86 N 100 100 Table 6 One-Way ANOVA