NEWSLETTER-2019-metin

147 ARBITRATION LAW the ICC Rules. The Court cannot consolidate the arbitrations governed by any rules other than the ICC Rules. Once the arbitrations are con- solidated, the dispute shall continue to be discussed in one arbitration proceeding only (in the first one that had been initiated, unless the par- ties agree otherwise). Three conditions must be met for consolidation. These three conditions are to be evaluated, separately, and a holistic assessment is not required. If one of these conditions is met, the Court may proceed with consolidation. The first condition set out in Article 10 is the parties’ consensus as to consolidation. If the parties agree to consolidate, the Court does not need to evaluate any other conditions. However, as stated above, consolidation is at the Court’s discretion, and it is not obliged to con- solidate the arbitrations despite the parties’ agreement to that end. As a second condition, the Court may consolidate the arbitrations if all of the claims in the arbitrations to be consolidated are based on the same arbitration agreement. As is clear, the provision mentions the existence of the “same arbitration agreement,” and not the “same con- tract.” It should be underlined that “same arbitration agreement” and/ or “more than one arbitration agreement” are separate issues than the “same contract” and/or “multiple contracts.” They all have different legal consequences. For instance, disputes might arise from several contracts, but be subject to one arbitration agreement between the par- ties. The third condition contains three sub-conditions: If the claims are made under more than one arbitration agreement, (i) the arbitra- tions must be between same parties, (ii) the disputes in the arbitrations have arisen in connection with the same legal relationship, and (iii) the Court finds the arbitration agreements to be compatible. Under this condition, the Court shall make a holistic assessment; meeting just one of the criteria would not suffice to consolidate the arbitrations. As stated, above, the Court has broad discretion as to consolida- tion. In parallel, the conditions set out, above, under the third condition, state the words ‘same legal relationship’ and ‘compatibility’ which entitle the Court with broad interpretation. The same legal relationship is interpreted by the Court as the same economic transaction and, as