The High Court of Australia holds that, in order to be an agreement to arbitrate under Article 7(1), the agreement must contain binding provisions for compulsory arbitration, whether following an election by a party or otherwise: PMT Partners Pty Ltd v Australian National Parks & Wildlife Service (1995) 184 CLR 301; in AGL Energy Limited/Jemena Gas Networks (NSW) Ltd [2017] NSWSC 765, [22] (in: Jemena Gas). To be valid under German law, an arbitration agreement must be clearly linked to a certain legal relationship, such as. B an underlying contract or existing dispute. It is not mandatory to define the institution or arbitral tribunal as long as it follows from the arbitration agreement, its structure and the surrounding circumstances that a judicial procedure of the State is excluded. In principle, German law allows all persons to settle their disputes through arbitration. However, subjective arbitration may be limited. For this way, restrictions apply to non-traders in certain financial services transactions (Article 37h of the Securities Trading Act) and to all parties subject to insolvency proceedings (Article 160(2) of the Insolvency Regulation). Some types of disputes cannot be arbitrators, such as for example. B criminal law, family law and disputes between the owner and the rental right. The cornerstone of the alleged judicial intervention in India may have been the Supreme Court`s decision in Bhatia International v. Bulk Trading S.A.1, which held that the provisions of Part 12 of the Act would apply to all arbitration proceedings and related proceedings.