text: termsofthecontract. Adecision bythearbitral tribunal thatthecontract isnullandvoidshallnotentailipsojuretheinvalidity ofthearbitration clause. "(2)Apleathatthearbitral tribunal doesnothavejurisdiction shallbe raisednotlaterthaninthestatement ofdefence. Apartyisnotprecluded fromraising suchapleabythefactthathehasappointed, orparticipated in theappointment of,anarbitrator. Apleathatthearbitraltribunal is exceeding thescopeofitsauthority shallberaisedpromptly afterthe arbitral tribunal hasindicated itsintention todecide onthematteralleged -29-tobebeyondthescopeofitsauthority. Thearbitral tribunal may,ineither case,admitalaterpleaifitconsiders thedelayjustified. "(3)Thearbitral tribunal !mayruleon apleareferred toinparagraph (2)of thisarticle eitherasa p~eliminary question orinanawardonthemerits. Ineithercase,arulingbythearbitral tribunal thatithasjurisdiction may becontested byanypartyonlyinanactionforsetting asidethearbitral award." Paragraph (1) 150.TheCommission wasagreedthatthewords"including anyobjections with respect totheexistence orval~dity ofthearbitration agreement" werenot intended tolimitthe"Kompeten!-KOmpetenz" ofthearbitral tribunal tothosecases whereapartyhadraisedanobj~ction. Consequently, thearbitral tribunal could decide onitsownmotionifthe~eweredoubtsorquestions astoitsjurisdiction, including theissueofarbitrability. 151.Asregards thepowergiven!tothearbitral tribunal inparagraph (1),concern ~ wasexpressed thattheprovisioh wouldnotbeacceptable tocertain Stateswhich didnotgrantsuchpowertoarbtitrators ortothoseparties whodidnotwant arbitrators toruleontheirownjurisdiction. Itwasstatedinreplythatthe principle embedded intheparag~aph was animportant oneforthefunctioning of international commercial arbitr~tionJ nonetheless,itwasultimately foreach State, whenadopting themodel ~aw,todecidewhetheritwishedtoacceptthe principle and,ifso,posSibly toexpress inthetext that parties couldexclude or limitthatpower. 152.Itwasnotedthattheapparent;vigouroftheEnglish words"hasthepowerto rule"were,forexample, notreflected intheFrenchwording "peutstatuer". The Commission, afterdeliberation, decided touseinalllanguages thelessvigorous wording "mayrule"without ther~by intending todeviate insubstance fromthe corresponding wording usedina:rticle 21 (1)oftheUNCITRAL Arbitration Rules. 153.TheCommission adopted par~9raph (1)assoamended. Paragraph (2) 154.Itwasstatedthatthethiirdsentence ofparagraph (2) was tooimprecise in thatitreferred totheindicatiion ofthearbitral tribunal's intention todecide on amatteralleged tobebeyon~thescopeofitsauthority. Itwaspointed out thatsuchintention wouldnormailly beclearonlywhentherewas an awardcovering thatmatter.Itwas,therefore:, suggested thatthesentence should bereplaced by aprovision modelled onarticle! V (1)ofthe1961GenevaConvention totheeffect thatthepleamustberaisedas:soonasthequestion onwhichthearbitral tribunal wasalleged tohavenojurisdicition wasraisedduringthearbitral proceedings. 155.Itwasrecognized thattheiproposed textwas more precise butalsomorerigid thanthecurrent text.Forinsitance, itwouldcovernotonlythoseinstances where therewas anindication ofthe:intention ofthearbitral tribunal itself,e.g. whereitrequested orexamined ~vidence relating toamatteroutsideitsscopeof authority, butalsothecase wh~reonepartyinitswritten ororalstatements raisedsuchamatter. Insuch ~case,undertheproposed texttheotherparty wouldhavetoraisehisobjection promptlY. Theconcern wasexpressed thatparties whowerenotsophisticated ininternational commercial arbitration mightnot -30-realize thatamatterexceeding thearbitral tribunal's jurisdiction hadbeen raisedandthattheywerecompelled toobjectpromptly. Moreover, itwassuggested thatinsomecasesthegoverning law,andtherefore limitations onarbitrability of certain disputes, mightnotbedetermined untilthetimeofaward,makingan earlier pleaimpossible. Asaresult, failure toraisethepleaatanearlier time shouldnotnecessarily preclude itsUseinsetting asideproceedings orin recognition andenforcement proceedings. 156.TheCommission, afterdeliberation, adopted paragraph (2),subject to modification ofthethirdsentence alongthefollowing lines: "Apleathatthe arbitral tribunal hasexceeded thescopeofitsauthority shallberaisedassoon asthequestion onwhichthearbitral tribunal isalleged tohavenojurisdiction israisedduringthearbitral proceedings." Paragraph (3)
analysis: This text appears to be discussing the rules and procedures of international commercial arbitration, specifically the powers and limitations of an arbitral tribunal. The language used is formal and technical, suggesting a focus on legal and regulatory issues. The text also references specific international conventions and model laws, indicating a connection to international trade and commerce.