1. Modern International ("MI"), an Omani manufacturing company owned by a Singapore national, entered into a Confidentiality Agreement (the "Agreement") with Tarbard Asset Management Ltd. ("Tarbard"), an UK based investment company. Pursuant to the Agreement, Tarbard agreed to invest in MI's re-entry into the Omani market and not to divulge MI's trade secrets. MI thereafter forwarded confidential information to Tarbard and engaged in further negotiations. However, Tarbard ultimately chose not to invest in MI and instead invested in one of MI's competitors.

In response, MI filed a petition to compel Arbitration in the Oman Court pursuant to a clause in the Agreement ("Article 9"), which states:

APPLICABLE LAW. This agreement will be governed by the laws of the Sultanate of Oman, a jurisdiction accepted by the parties irrespective of the fact that the principal activity of the company project will be conducted in Oman. The parties agree that, in the event that differences arise between them as a result of or in relation to the present Agreement, they will attempt to resolve their differences via direct negotiation. For this purpose, the parties will have a period of thirty (30) business days, counting from the date on which either of the parties presents a request in this regard. This term may be extended by mutual agreement for additional thirtyday period. If a solution is not reached within these stipulated periods, the differences will be submitted to an Arbitration Board, whose ruling will carry the force of law.

Tarbard moved to dismiss the petition, arguing that the Oman Court did not have personal jurisdiction over Tarbard, a nonresident defendant.

Advise the parties. (10 marks)

Hint: Focus on the "jurisdiction".