<?xml version="1.0"?>
<oembed><version>1.0</version><provider_name>Ma&#xEE;tre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p&#xE9;nal &#xE0; Paris</provider_name><provider_url>https://kohenavocats.com/ru/</provider_url><author_name>Ma&#xEE;tre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p&#xE9;nal &#xE0; Paris</author_name><author_url>https://kohenavocats.com/ru/</author_url><title>SEA2011 Inc v ICT Ltd</title><type>rich</type><width>600</width><height>338</height><html>&lt;blockquote class="wp-embedded-content" data-secret="spOmq3YkmW"&gt;&lt;a href="https://kohenavocats.com/ru/jurisprudences/sea2011-inc-v-ict-ltd/"&gt;SEA2011 Inc v ICT Ltd&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;iframe sandbox="allow-scripts" security="restricted" src="https://kohenavocats.com/ru/jurisprudences/sea2011-inc-v-ict-ltd/embed/#?secret=spOmq3YkmW" width="600" height="338" title="&#xAB;SEA2011 Inc v ICT Ltd&#xBB; &#x2014; Ma&#xEE;tre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p&#xE9;nal &#xE0; Paris" data-secret="spOmq3YkmW" frameborder="0" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no" class="wp-embedded-content"&gt;&lt;/iframe&gt;&lt;script&gt;
/*! This file is auto-generated */
!function(d,l){"use strict";l.querySelector&amp;&amp;d.addEventListener&amp;&amp;"undefined"!=typeof URL&amp;&amp;(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&amp;&amp;!/[^a-zA-Z0-9]/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret="'+t.secret+'"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret="'+t.secret+'"]'),c=new RegExp("^https?:$","i"),i=0;i&lt;o.length;i++)o[i].style.display="none";for(i=0;i&lt;a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&amp;&amp;(s.removeAttribute("style"),"height"===t.message?(1e3&lt;(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r&lt;200&amp;&amp;(r=200),s.height=r):"link"===t.message&amp;&amp;(r=new URL(s.getAttribute("src")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&amp;&amp;n.host===r.host&amp;&amp;l.activeElement===s&amp;&amp;(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener("message",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll("iframe.wp-embedded-content"),r=0;r&lt;s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute("data-secret"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+="#?secret="+t,e.setAttribute("data-secret",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:"ready",secret:t},"*")},!1)))}(window,document);
//# sourceURL=https://kohenavocats.com/wp-includes/js/wp-embed.min.js
&lt;/script&gt;
</html><description>1. This is a claim brought to determine a jurisdictional challenge under section 67 Arbitration Act 1996. The challenge relates to an arbitration which the defendant, ICT Ltd, brought against the claimant, SEA2011 Inc, pursuant to an arbitration agreement in clause 10.1 of a written Sales Agency Agreement dated 28 January 2011. These underlying arbitration proceedings were commenced by ICT...</description></oembed>
