The dispute
The claimant sought release of a car from attachment, relying on an arbitral award establishing title. The court examined the arbitration and the content of a website associated with the arbitrator.
What the court considered
The website offered dispute resolution, filing and acceptance of claims through court staff, and consultations. The court treated this as advertising, a public offer to conduct arbitration and evidence of de facto administration. It also found circumstances indicating a simulated dispute intended to remove an asset from attachment.
The limits of the finding
This is a first-instance decision in a particular property dispute. It does not create an independent prohibition on the word “arbitration”. The offers and actual activity mattered. This note does not assess the case’s subsequent procedural history.
General information. The applicable legal framework depends on the particular dispute, seat and enforcement country.