Philippine Law School

Pasay City

Alternative Dispute Resolution

2nd Semester, S.Y. 2016-17 /Thursdays, 7-9 p.m.

Quiz No. 2 December 15, 2016

Name: MA. GLYNDORES Y. BAUTISTALLA

TRUE OR FALSE (1 point each)

1. False
2. True
3. False
4. True
5. True
6. True
7. True

IDENTIFICATION (1 point each)

8. Philippine Dispute Resolution Center Inc (PDRCI)

9. Hongkong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC)
10. Construction Industry

ESSAY (5 point each)

11. The Arbitration Clause of the Employment Agreement between MCMC and
MCHC and Rolando Zosa was declared partially void and of no effect in so far
as the composition of the panel of arbitrators is concerned, because the law
says, “Any clause giving one of the parties power to choose more arbitrators
than the other is void and of no effect.” (Article 2045, Civil Code)

12. The doctrine of separability is the principle that an arbitration agreement is

a separate contract, not necessarily affected by the invalidity, ineffectiveness
or non-existence of the main contract.
This principle was applied by the Supreme Court in Koppel, Inc. v. Makati
Rotary Club Foundation, Inc. (G.R. No. 198075, September 4, 2013) when it
ruled that the “petitioner may still invoke the arbitration clause of the 2005
Lease Contract notwithstanding the fact that it assails the validity of such
contract. This is due to the doctrine of separability. Under the doctrine of
separability, an arbitration agreement is considered as independent of the
main contract. Being a separate contract in itself, the arbitration agreement
may thus be invoked regardless of the possible nullity or invalidity of the main
contract. Once again instructive is Cargill, wherein this Court held that, as a
further consequence of the doctrine of separability, even the very party who
repudiates the main contract may invoke its arbitration clause.”