French legislation on international arbitration does not provide for a special formality requirement for arbitration agreements. French law confirms both the positive and negative effects of the jurisdictional principle: arbitration tribunals are exclusively competent to rule on objections to their jurisdiction3 and, where a dispute, the subject of an arbitration agreement is tried by a court, opts for such a tribunal, unless a court of arbitration has not yet been referred to the dispute and if the arbitration agreement is manifestly null and clearly unenforceable.16 The case concerned a dispute between three Brazilians. Companies participating in an offshore oil extraction consortium in Brazil that are governed by a Joint Enterprise Agreement (JAA) that led to the exclusion of one of the consortium members and prevented him from selling his stake in the JOA. The excluded member commenced arbitration proceedings in Paris under the aegis of the LCIA to challenge the validity of the joa clauses and obtain compensation for the injury suffered. On September 24, 2018, the Court of Arbitration inherited a Phase I award. On November 2, 2018, a new lawyer was admitted to the team of one of the accused, which led to an update of the arbitrators` declaration of independence and revealed new information. Following an unsuccessful challenge by one of the arbitrators, the applicant brought an appeal to quash the award on the grounds that the arbitrator chosen by one of the defendants did not disclose personal ties to a law firm which, as a sponsor, had the majority shareholder of that party, and that this omission called into question the independence and impartiality of the arbitrator from the point of view of a reasonable observer. The defendant argued that such links constituted well-known facts that the arbitrator was not in a position to disclose. A contractual agreement that determines the court and where the parties wish to have their disputes decided is commonly referred to as the “forum selection clause.” The reasons for the independence and impartiality of arbitrators were thoroughly examined in the previous issue13.13 In particular, the obligation to disclose without delay circumstances that impair their independence or impartiality by arbitrators impairing their independence or impartiality was discussed at length in the decision of the Court of Appeal of 27 March 2018 in the Audi Volkswagen case.14 The case concerned agreements for the distribution of vehicles and spare parts of Volkswagen and Audi by the Qatari company. , as well as other related after-sales services. The Paris Court of Appeal set aside the ICC`s arbitration award on the grounds that the Court of Arbitration had not been properly constituted, as the arbitrator had not disclosed the links between his law firm and the Volkswagen Group units, as these circumstances could cast a reasonable doubt on its independence and impartiality.