Recently, all the magistrates of the Third Circuit in Civil Matters published a thesis of jurisprudence in response to thesis number PC.III.C.J 33 C (10a.), the heading to which reads: “Jurisdiction by express submission. For the validity of the agreement described herein, it suffices that the court to which the parties are bound is expressly designated, even if only one of the parties waives the jurisdiction granted by law.” In this decision, all the magistrates of the Third Circuit in Civil Matters concluded that in order to be effective, in the submission of an oral agreement to the court designated by the parties to a contract, it is sufficient if the parties manifest in a clear and definitive manner, which court they will be bound by in the event of a controversy between them. Furthermore, in this case, the contracting parties voluntarily waive the jurisdiction that by law corresponds to them. This is true even when such waiver refers only to a party that does not fall into any of the following categories: a) domicile of one of the parties in dispute; b) the place of performance of any of the obligations under the contract; or c) the location of the assets in dispute, which must be taken into consideration when drafting a contract.