A counterclaim concerning a debt contractually referred to the cognisance of arbitrators is inadmissible before the ordinary courts.
The operation of the arbitration agreement does not extend to claims which, although pleaded as connected, are not shown to be attributable to the relationship referred to the arbitrators, it not being permissible to refer to arbitrators connected cases pending before the ordinary courts.
A stay of proceedings on the ground that the arbitral decision is a necessary antecedent presupposes that both sets of proceedings are concurrently pending, and cannot be ordered where no arbitration has been commenced.