Home   About us   About ADR   NADR Services   Publications
  Forms   Members   Forums   Links   NMA
• Adjudication
• Adjudication Federal Australia
• Adjudication Law Reports
• Adjudication Law Reports 1999
• Adjudication Law Reports 2000
• Adjudication Law Reports 2001
• Adjudication Law Reports 2002
• Adjudication Law Reports 2003
• Adjudication Law Reports 2004
• Adjudication Law Reports 2005
• Adjudication Law Reports 2006
• Adjudication Law Reports 2007
• Adjudication Law Reports 2008
• Adjudication Law Reports Index
• Adjudication New South Wales
• Adjudication New Zealand
• Adjudication Northern Territory
• Adjudication Queensland
• Adjudication Singapore
• Adjudication South Australia
• Adjudication Tasmania
• Adjudication Victoria
• Adjudication Western Australia
• ADR Law Reports
• ADR Law Reports 1997
• ADR Law Reports 1998
• ADR Law Reports 1999
• ADR Law Reports 2000
• ADR Law Reports 2001
• ADR Law Reports 2002
• ADR Law Reports 2003
• ADR Law Reports 2004
• ADR Law Reports 2005
• ADR Law Reports 2006
• ADR Law Reports 2007
• ADR Law Reports 2008
• ADR Law Reports Index
• Alernative Dispute Resolution
• Arbitration
• Arbitration Law Reports 1996
• Arbitration Law Reports 1997
• Arbitration Law Reports 1998
• Arbitration Law Reports 1999
• Arbitration Law Reports 2000
• Arbitration Law Reports 2001
• Arbitration Law Reports 2002
• Arbitration Law Reports 2003
• Arbitration Law Reports 2004
• Arbitration Law Reports 2005
• Arbitration Law Reports 2006
• Arbitration Law Reports 2007
• Arbitration Law Reports 2008
• Arbitration Law Reports Index
• Arbitration Older Reports
• Banking
• Commercial Law Reports 1997
• Commercial Law Reports 1998
• Commercial Law Reports 1999
• Commercial Law Reports 2000
• Commercial Law Reports 2001
• Commercial Law Reports 2002
• Commercial Law Reports 2003
• Commercial Law Reports 2004
• Commercial Law Reports 2005
• Commercial Law Reports 2006
• Commercial Law Reports 2007
• Commercial Law Reports 2008
• Commercial Law Reports Index
• Conflicts of Law
• Constitution Law Reports
• Constitutional Law
• Construction
• Construction Law Reports
• Construction Law Reports 2000
• Construction Law Reports 2001
• Construction Law Reports 2002
• Construction Law Reports 2003
• Construction Law Reports 2004
• Construction Law Reports 2005
• Construction Law Reports 2006
• Construction Law Reports 2007
• Construction Law Reports 2008
• Construction Law Reports Index
• Dispute Review Boards
• Education
• Employment
• Intellectual Property
• Legal Research
• Legal Skills and Practice
• Mediation
• Medical
• Private International Law
• Public International Law
• Public Law
• Shipping & Trade
• Sports Law
• Who's Who



View a printer friendly version of this page.
Ace Capital Ltd v CMS Energy Corporation [2008] APP.L.R. 07/30
Successful application for a permanent anti-suit injunction in respect of Michegan litigation - in favour of LCIA arbitration of insurance disputes. Commercial Court. 30th July 2008
by Mr Justice Christopher Clarke : Crown Copyright

AIC Ltd v Marine Pilot Ltd [2008] APP.L.R. 03/07
S69 AA Act 1996 challenge. Questions of law : entitlement to deadfreight and / or action for breach of safe port obligations in the alternative. Three consecutive voyage charterparties in Asbatankvoy form. CA. 7th March 2008
by Sir Anthony Clarke MR; Longmore LJ; Sir William Aldous. Crown Copyright

Alan Peter Ide v ATB Sales Ltd : Lexus Financial Service t/a Toyota F.S. UK Plc v Sandra Russell [2008] APP.L.R. 04/28
Burden of proof : judicial approach : The approach a judge is entitled to take to the determination of proof of causation where alternative mechanisms of causation were put before the court. In each case the sole issue before the court was whether the respondent to the appeal who had suffered the damage could prove on a balance of probabilities that a defect had caused the damage sustained; each appellant contended that the judge had adopted a train of reasoning which the House of Lords made clear in The Popi M [1985] 1 WLR 948 (Rhesa Shipping Co SA v Edmunds) was impermissible. CA. 28th April 2008.
by Ward LJ; Dyson LJ; Thomas LJ.

Alberta Inc v Katanga Mining Ltd [2008] APP.L.R. 11/05
Forum conveniens : Place of business : whether Democratic Republic of Congo a venue where the claimant might be accorded justice or is rife with corruption and systemic instability. Commercial Court. 5th November 2008
by Mr Justice Tomlinson : Crown Copyright

Allianz SpA (formerly Riunione Adriatica Di Sicurta SpA) v West Tankers Inc. Case C 185/07
Anti Suit injunction in support of arbitration : Whether compatible with EU Law. Opinion (non-binding) to the ECJ by Advocat General Kokott. Non-compatible - following rationale in Turner v Grovit. All courts in member states are Kompetenze Kompetenze - and deserve to be accorded mutual respect.
by Kokott Advocate General (Opinion) : Copyright

Apollo Engineering Ltd v James Scott Ltd [2008] APP.L.R. 03/07
Expenses : Judicial review of power of arbiter in interlocuotories to order payment of expenses. Arbitration not governed by rules – only the common law. Outer House Court of Session. 7th March 2008
by Lor Malcolm : Crown Copyright

Ardentia Ltd. v British Telecommunications Plc [2008] APP.L.R. 06/19
S9 AA 1996 : Stay Jurisdiction of Chancery to issue interim injunction : arbitral tribunal to issue permanent injnction. Chancery. 19th June 2008
by David Donaldson Q.C.(sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge). Crown Copyright

Artibell Shipping Co Ltd. v Markel International Insurance Co Ltd [2008] APP.L.R. 04/24
Strike out : Abuse of process. Defendant underwriters seek an order striking out the action brought against them by the claimant shipowners on the grounds of abuse of process and/or delay. In the alternative they seek an order imposing conditions on the continued prosecution of the claim and, in any event, security for their costs. Commercial Court. 24th April 2008
by Mr Justice David Steel: Crown Copyright

ASC Anglo Scottish Concrete Ltd v Geminax Ltd [2008] APP.L.R. 10/10
Validity of trial by conference call : Absence of scope for cross questioning : Dispute as to quality of concrete supplied to construction works - non-payment. Outer House Court of Session. 10th October 2008
by Lords Eassie; Emslie, Lady Paton. Crown Copyright

Barlow Clowes International Ltd v Henwood [2008] APP.L.R. 05/23
Jurisdiction : Domicile : For the purposes of a winding up petition was the respondent domiciled in England & Wales or overseas at the relevant time. Test for domicile restated. Held : Yes, on the facts, he was domiciled in E & W. CA. 23rd May 2008.
by Waller LJ; Arden LJ; Moore-Bick LJ. Crown Copyright

Berghoff Trading Ltd v Swinbrook Developments Ltd [2008] APP.L.R. 07/28
Freezing Order : Application for summary judgement on counterclaim granted : no real prospect of success : accordingly freezing order removed. Commercial Court. 28th July 2008
by Mr. Justice Teare: : Crown Copyright

Braes of Doune Wind Farm Ltd v Alfred McaLpine Business Services Ltd [2008] APP.L.R. 03/13
S2 AA 1996 Seat of tribunal : s69 Challenge. Place of arbitration Glasgow : Arbitration Act 1996 and CIMAR Rules goverened the process : Where was the seat? Held : England and Wales. Liquidated damages clause under a Silver Book ICE contract held to be an unenforceable penalty by the arbitrator. Held : Not obviously wrong – and in the circumstances whilst a strange result – not wrong either – application to appeal refused. TCC. 13th March 2008
by Mr. Justice Akenhead: Crown Copyright

Brietenbucher v Wittke [2008] APP.L.R. 10/16
Defender who is sued by an administrator, signed a construction contract subject to German law and jurisdiction in Germany but is domiciled in Scotland. The court found that she contracted as an individual not as a trader and accordingly under Article 2.1 Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 she should be sued in her country of domicile. Hence the Court of Session has jurisdiction. Outer House Court of Session. 16th October 2008.
by Lord Brodie. Crown Copyright

Carleton v Strutt & Parker (A Partnership) [2008] APP.L.R. 04/24
Interest : Guiding principles as to when interest should be awarded. QBD. 24th April 2008
by Mr Justice Jack : Crown Copyright

Carver v BAA Plc [2008] APP.L.R. 04/22
Costs : Part 36 payment. If a claimant beats a payment of money into court by a modest amount, even £1, has she obtained a judgment more advantageous than the defendant\'s Part 36 offer or is the Court entitled to look at all the circumstances of the case in deciding where the balance of advantage lies? His Honour Judge Knight QC sitting in the Central London County Court on 4th June 2007 took the latter, broad view and so he ordered the claimant to pay the defendant\'s costs of the claim after the time for accepting the payment had expired. He also made no order for costs for the prior period covered by an earlier Calderbank offer. Failed appeal. CA. 22nd April 2008
by Ward LJ; Rix LJ; Keene LJ. Crown Copyright

Cherney v Deripaska [2008] APP.L.R. 07/03
Forum conveniens : purported oral contract subject to English Law & Jurisdiction : Court determined that the risks inherent in a trial in Russia (assassination, arrest on trumped up charges and lack of a fair trial) are sufficient to make England the forum in which the case can most suitably be tried in the interests of both parties and the ends of justice and, accordingly, the proper place for the determination of this claim. Commercial Court. 3rd July 2008
by Mr Justice Christopher Clarke : Crown Copyright

City of London v Sancheti [2008] APP.L.R. 11/21
Appeal against refusal of stay to arbitration : BIT / ICSID : This application concerns the relationship between an international arbitration under a BIT and national court proceedings, and, in particular, whether Roussel-Uclaf v GD Searle & Co Ltd [1978] 1 Lloyd\'s Rep 225 was right to give a very extensive interpretation of the stay provisions of what is now s 9 Arbitration Act 1996 so as to apply it to persons who were not parties to the arbitration agreement. Held : The United Kingdom, not the City of London, party to the arbitration. Appeal failed / stay refused. CA. 21st November 2008.
by Laws LJ; Richards LJ; Lawrence Collins LJ. Crown Copyright

CMA CGM SA v Hyundai Mipo Dockyard Co Ltd [2008] APP.L.R. 11/14
Novation : arbitration clause : whether tribunal governed by French judgement : CMA commenced a tort action in France against HMD for unreasonably refusing to novate a contract. Following late novation - whether the arbitration clause in the contract required the French action to be terminated. Held : Yes. Whether the judgements regulations apply to tribunals or only to court. Held : Only to courts. Note - tort action not sustainable under english Law. Commercial Court. 14th November 2008.
by Mr Justice Burton : Crown Copyright

Coal Authority v Davidson [2008] APP.L.R. 09/09
S69 AA 1996 challenge. Arbitrator erred in ordering the coal authority to purchase two properties suffering blight due to subsidence in adjoining properties. The court held that the statutory regime only allowed for compensation for subsidence damage and potential subsidence in the future. The respondents had already received compensation and remedial works for subsidence : the mining activities were at an end and no futher subsidence anticipated. The Act does not allow compensation for blight and pure economic loss. TCC. 9th September 2008
by Mr Justice Coulson : Crown Copyright

Colliers International Property Consultants v Colliers Jordan Lee Jafaar Sdn Bhd [2008] APP.L.R. 07/03
Set aside application of a s66 AA 1996 Order that an ICC award be made into a judgment of the court in the terms of the award. Allegations regarding personality - service etc. Set aside refused. Commercial Court. 3rd July 2008.
by Mr Justice Beatson: Crown Copyright

Crest Nicholson (Eastern) Ltd v Western [2008] APP.L.R. 06/16
S31 AA 1996 Jurisdiction. home build contract : Owner successfully lodged a complaint with NHBC which resulted in a ruling that the builder carry out £20,000 remedial work. Owner left with a £7,000 surveryors bill in relation to the complaint and sought to recover this through arbitration. Question : Is the owner/purchasor a party to the NHBC arbitration provision? Held : no. - this is only between NHBC & the builder – and subject to CIArb appointment. RICS appointed arbitrator invalidly appointed – no arbitration provision between owner/builder. The costs of arbitral proceedings not recoverable. TCC. 16th June 2008
by Mr Justice Akenhead : Crown Copyright

CTI Group Inc v Transclear SA [2008] APP.L.R. 07/22
Frustration : Suppliers refused to supply goods to cif seller in furtherance of a cartel agreement. Held : In absence of terms in contract, the risk of supply falls on the cif seller. No frustration. Case turned not on the determination of facts by tribunal which could not be challenged - but on whether those facts mirrored the legal requirements for frustration. CA. 22nd July 2008.
by Ward LJ; Moore-Bick LJ; Rimer LJ. Crown Copyright

Curtis v Lockheed Martin UK Holdings Ltd [2008] APP.L.R. 02/20
Stay of action pending outcome of deliberation by Italian Court on procedural grounds refused. Commercial Court. 20th February 2008
by Mr Justice Teare. Crown Copyright

Cuthbert v Gair (t/a The Bowes Manor Equestrian Centre) [2008] APP.L.R. 09/03
Costs : Recovery : work done by non-solicitor not recoverable unless commissioned by solicitor and even then not recoverable if work that should be done by the legal profession. 3rd September 2008
by Master Haworth Costs Judge.Crown Copyright

Dadourian Group International Inc v Simms [2008] APP.L.R. 07/25
Legal privilege : Information acquired by whistle blower - downloaded from hard drive of legal consultant\'s computer : admissibility. Chancery. 25th July 2008.
by Mr Justice Patten : Crown Copyright

Dallah Real Estate & Tourism Holding Co v Min. of Religious Affairs, Gov. of Pakistan [2008] APP.L.R. 08/01
Appeal on s103(2)(b) grounds – that the arbitration agreement was not lawful in the state where the contract was carried out - against leave to enforce an ICC arbitration award pursuant to s101. Rather than contract in its own name the government of Pakistan created a Trust to contract on its behalf – but subsequently revoked the trust be not passing the necessary legislation. The tribunal had invoked concepts of “transnational arbitration law” to extend the liabilities under the contract to Pakistan. Here the court applied the procedural law of the tribunal seat – France – to the question of legality and contractual personality – concluded that the French Court would have had regard to the law of Pakistan and since under that law there was no contractual nexus and the arbitration clause did not lawfully bind the state in the absence of the signature of the President – the award was not binding or enforceable. Commercial Court. 1st August 2008
by Mr Justice Aikens: Crown Copyright

Deutsche Bank AG v Asia Pacific Broadband Wireless Communications Inc [2008] APP.L.R. 04/30
Arbitration and Jurisdiction clauses : validity. Application to amend in light of defence of invalidity of contract – absence of authority. Assuming there was no authority to contract or to agree arbitration and jurisdiction provisions, could arbitration be invoked in respected of amended alternative claims to breach of contract. Held : There is no severability of jurisdiction clause : validity of arbitration clause to be considered separately - but whilst an arguable case, case not established. Commercial Court. 30th April 2008
by Mr Justice Flaux: Crown Copyright

Dix v Townend [2008] APP.L.R. 06/30
Champerty & exceptions under CFA legislation. Costs Court. 30th June 2008
by Deputy Master Victoria William. Crown Copyright.

Elektrim SA v Vivendi Holdings 1 Corp [2008] APP.L.R. 10/24
Construction of a \"no-action\" clause in a bond issue, whereby only the trustee of the issue is entitled to take enforcement action against the issuer, and bondholders cannot proceed directly against the issuer unless the trustee fails to take action in accordance with the bond documentation. CA. 24th October 2008.
by Sir Anthony May; Hallett LJ; Lawrence Collins LJ. Crown Copyright

Emmott v Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd [2008] APP.L.R. 03/12
Confidentiality : privacy : piercing the veil : interests of justice : Whilst it is clearly established under English law that the arbitration process is both private and confidential, there are exceptions to the rule : a beneficiary might waive the protection – particularly when challenging or enforcing a award – and the courts can override the privilege in the interests of justice – to allow arbitral proceedings to be disclosed to a domestic or forieng court.CA. 12th March 2008
by Carnwath LJ; Thomas LJ; Lawrence Collins LJ. Crown Copyright

Entico Corp Ltd v United Nations Educational Scientific & Cultural Assoc (UNESCO) [2008] APP.L.R. 03/18
Immunity - UN: arbitration agreement. Whether the immunity from suit of the UN precluded arbitral jurisdiction in a contract for the production of a calendar. UN pulled out of contract – claimant seeks damages for loss. Commercial Court. 18th March 2008
by Mr Justice Tomlinson: Crown Copyright

Equitas Ltd v Allstate Insurance Company [2008] APP.L.R. 07/17
Stay pending outcome of third party Texas arbitration between Allstate v Highland regarding reinsurance : Held : Stay refused : danger that the tribunal might rule against Equitas\\\'s interests - in an action that Equitas was not a party - and potential difficulties as to the enforceability of such an award. Commercial Court. 17th July 2008
by Mr Justice Beatson. Crown Copyright

ETI Euro Telecom International NV v Republic of Bolivia & Entel No2 [2008] APP.L.R. 07/28
Freezing order - risk of dissipation of funds : State Immunity : New York arbitration pending under ICSID : unsuccessful appeal. CA. 28th July 2008
by Tuckey LJ; Lawrence Collins LJ; Stanley Burnton LJ. Crown Copyright

ETI Euro Telecom International NV v Republic of Bolivia & Entel [2008] APP.L.R. 07/11
Freezing order - risk of dissipation of funds : State Immunity : New York arbitration pending under ICSID : Costs on indemnity basis. Commercial Court. 11th July 2008
by Mr Justice Andrew Smith. Crown Copyright

Galliford Try Construction Ltd v Mott MacDonald Ltd [2008] APP.L.R. 03/14
Without prejudice : Privilege. Successful application to strike out portions of a witness statmentent on the grounds of negotiation privilege. TCC. 14th March 2008
by Mr Justice Coulson : Crown Copyright

Gater Assets Ltd v NAK Naftogaz Ukrainiy No2 [2008] APP.L.R. 05/21
s101(3) AA 1996 : Whether interest pursuant to s17 Judments Act 1838 can be awarded by an enforcing court in respect of a New York Award, where the tribunal did not refer to interest in the award. Held : Yes. Commercial Court. 21st May 2008
by Mr Justice Beatson : Crown Copyright

Gater Assets Ltd v Nak Naftogaz Ukrainiy [2008] APP.L.R. 02/15
S103 AA 1996 Challenge to enforcement of award. Appeal against an enforcement order on grounds of public policy – based on absence of full and frank disclosure. Court concluded that if material now available had been put to the tribunal the outcome would have been different. The court concluded that it would not have altered the outcome and hence the award stands. Commercial Court. 15th February 2008
by Mr Justice Tomlinson : Crown Copyright

Golden President Shipping Corporation v Bocimar NV [2008] APP.L.R. 01/31
S69 AA 1996 challenge. Whether or not the terms of a contract made years 6 & 7 subject to pain and gain provisions and hence a share of profits. Award partially amended. Commercial Court. 31st January 2008
by Mr Justice Cooke : Crown Copyright

Greene Wood & McLean v Templeton Insurance Ltd [2008] APP.L.R. 07/10
Unsuccessful challenge to order allowing service out of jurisdiction : Isle of Man : grounds of challenge : failure by the Claimant to make full and frank disclosure when seeking permission and the absence of reasonable prospects of success for the claim - but service restricted to a contribution claim. Commercial Court. 10th July 2008.
by Mr. Justice Teare : Crown Copyright

Hodsoll v Hon Louisa-Jane Hanbury [2008] APP.L.R. 08/06
s69 AA 1996 : Unsuccessful application to appeal arbitrator\'s award on liability of surety / lessee for outstanding repairs on termination of a lease : Held : Not obviously wrong - right test applied by tribunal : even if wrong - no issue of general importance. Chancery 6th August 2008
by Mr Justice Morgan : Crown Copyright

IPCO (Nigeria) Ltd. v Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation [2008] APP.L.R. 04/17
S103 AA 1998 – New York : Partial enfrcement. Application for partial enforcement of an award subject to a previous adjournment of enforcement action pending outcome of challenge before Nigerian Court, in circumstances where 3 years had passed and challenge still ongoing : Held : Court could award partial enforcement of elements of award not seriously subject to challenge. Commercial Court. 17th April 2008.
by Mr Justice Tomlinson : Crown Copyright

Jackson v Dowdall [2008] APP.L.R. 07/08
Case management : role of Sherrif : Competence : boundary between the proper role in adversarial procedure as an impartial arbiter between the parties to an action. Communications by phone and email. Management requires the taking of steps which concern the substance of the dispute between the parties : ensuring that the matters in dispute are clearly focused ; that the issues which require to be resolved by judicial decision, rather than other means, are identified ; establishing the order in which issues should be determined in open court and how : but making a party’s case is not permissible. Outer House Court of Session.
by Lords Reed ; Clarke ; Menzies : Crown Copyright

Jirehouse Capital v Beller No1 [2008] APP.L.R. 01/16
Security of costs : application. Chancery. 16th January 2008
by Mr Justice Briggs. Crown Copyright

Jirehouse Capital v Beller No2 [2008] APP.L.R. 07/30
Orders for security of costs : Does CPR 25.12 & 13 apply to unlimited companies and Does the condition in the 2nd limb of CPR 25.13(2)(c) that \"there is a reason to believe that it will be unable to pay the defendant\'s costs if ordered to do so\" mean that the court must be satisfied on a balance of probabilities that the company will be unable to pay those costs when ordered to do so. CA. 30th July 2008
by Mummery LJ; Arden LJ; Moore-Bick LJ. Crown Copyright

Koo Golden East Mongolia (A Body Corporate) v Bank of Nova Scotia [2008] APP.L.R. 05/20
Unsuccessful application for a wasted costs order. Administrative Court. 20th May 2008
by Mr Justice Silber: Crown Copyright

Korea National Insurance Co v Allianz Global Corporate & Specialty AG [2008] APP.L.R. 11/18
This is the judgement of the court on a preliminary issue as to whether certain contentions pleaded by Defendants are beyond the jurisdiction of the court by reason of the doctrine of act of state or the doctrine of non-justiciability. 18th November 2008
by Mr Justice Field. Crown Copyright

Korea National Insurance Corp (KNIC) v Allianz Global Corporate & Speciality AG [2008] APP.L.R. 12/02
Foreign immunity : Non-judiciability : The test in respect of the embarrassment of foreign governments and causing ruptures in foreign relationships. Reinsurance liability and North Korea. CA. 2nd December 2008
by Waller LJ : Rix LJ : Thomas LJ. Crown Copyright

Majorboom Ltd v National House Building Council [2008] APP.L.R. 10/24
s69 AA 1996 unsuccessful application to appeal on a point of law. Held : All points questions of fact dressed up as law - viz whether or not a director had actual or imputed knowledge of defects to property which gave rise to a right to refer dispute to arbitration under the NHBC rules. TCC. 24th October 2008.
by Mr Justice Coulson : Crown Copyright

Metropolitan Property Realizations Ltd v Atmore Investments Ltd [2008] APP.L.R. 11/28
s68 Arbitration Act 1998 challenge to rent review award : Held : Arbitrator failed to factor in a notional profit from sublets into the determination of a fair rent. Award sent back for corection. Chancery. 28th November 2008
by Mr Justice Sales. Crown Copyright

Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd v Emmott [2008] APP.L.R. 11/06
s67 AA. 1996. Procedural Orders versus Interim Award on jurisdiction : Held : Whether an order or an award was a matter of substance not of form. In the cirucmstances the tribunal issued orders as to amendment of claim and disclosure - neither of which was open to a s67 challenge. Commercial Court. 6th November 2008.
by Mr Justice Teare. Crown Copyright

Middle Eastern Oil LLC v National Bank of Abu Dhabi [2008] APP.L.R. 11/27
Choice of Law and Forum : Tort action : loss sustained by sums in bank account being frozen pending investigations of allegations of money laundering : Impact upon share value of english Company forced into a creditors voluntary liquidation - resulting in the applicant losing $6M. Banking contract subject to UAE law. Held : UAE the proper forum - seized of whether UAE or English Law to apply. Commercial Court. 27th November 2008.
by Mr Justice Teare. Crown Copyright

Mills v Birchall [2008] APP.L.R. 04/18
Liquidation - suit - costs : Appeal against cost judgment that company in liquidation liable for failed costs of litigation : attempt to render administrator liable for costs : Held : Appeal failed - it was for the defendant to apply for security of costs : failed to do so. Now too late. CA. 18th April 2008
by Mummery LJ; Lawrence Collins LJ; Mr Justice Munby. Crown Copyright

Mobil Cerro Negro Ltd v Petroleos De Venezuela SA [2008] APP.L.R. 03/18
S44 AA 1998 – Freezing order - privacy. Successful application for set aside of a freezing order pursuant to an arbitration. Confidentiality / privacy respected so that underlying commercial matters not disclosed in the report. Commercial Court. 18th March 2008
by Mr Justice Walker : Crown Copyright

Mylcrist Builders Ltd v Buck [2008] APP.L.R. 09/19
Invalid unilateral appointment under s17(1) Arbitration Act 1996 : Consumer arbitration - terms in contract insufficiently clear to comply with Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1994 & 1999. Consumer objected and took no part in the process. Award unenforceable. TCC. 19th September 2008
by Mr Justice Ramsey : Crown Copyright

Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation v IPCO (Nigeria) Ltd [2008] APP.L.R. 10/21
S103 AA 1996 : NYCEA - enforcement. Can part of a New York Convention arbitration award be enforced? How should sequential applications for enforcement of such an award be approached? CA. 21st October 2008.
by Tuckey LJ; Wall LJ; Rimer LJ. Crown Copyright

Orascom Telecom Holding SAE v Republic of Chad [2008] APP.L.R. 07/28
State immunity : application by the Claimant, for a final Third Party Debt Order (what used to be called a Garnishee Order) in respect of monies held by the Third Party Citibank NA for the First Defendant, the Republic of Chad in order to enforce its unpaid Arbitration Award by the International Chamber of Commerce against Chad. Commercial Court. 28th July 2008.
by Mr Justice Burton : Crown Copyright

R v V [2008] APP.L.R. 07/03
Challenge to an award under section 68(2)(g) of the Arbitration Act 1996 on the grounds that the award is contrary to English public policy; and a challenge to enforcement of the same award under section 81(1) (c) of the Act on the grounds that the award is contrary to public policy at common law. Commercial Court. 3rd July 2008
by Mr Justice David Steel : Crown Copyright

Satyam Computer Services Ltd v Upaid Systems Ltd [2008] APP.L.R. 01/17
Anti-suit injunction : Whether actions in Texas were the subject of an entire settlement agreement subject to English Law and jurisdiction. Held : Actions concerned new rights not contemplated by the agreement. Injunction refused. Commercial Court. 17th January 2008
by Mr Justice Flaux: Crown Copyright

Scottish & Newcastle International Limited v Othon Ghalanos Ltd [2008] APP.L.R. 02/20
Jurisdiction : export contract to EC member state. Where is delivery made in an fob export contract ? At ships rail in export country – impact upon jurisdiction ; application of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001. House of Lords. 20th February 2008
by Lords Bingham ; Rodger ; Brown ; Mance ; Neuberger : Crown Copyright

Serena Navigation Ltd v Dera Commercial Establishment Standard Chartered Plc [2008] APP.L.R. 05/15
Limitation Article IV Rule 5(a)Hague Visby Rules : Unless the nature and value of such goods have been declared by the shipper before shipment and inserted in the bill of lading, neither the carrier nor the ship shall in any event be or become liable for any loss or damage to or in connection with the goods in an amount exceeding 666.77 [Special Drawing Rights] per package or unit or 2 [Special Drawing Rights] per kilogram of gross weight of the goods lost or damaged, whichever is the higher.\" Is limitation based on gross cargo loaded or the damaged cargo. Held : Gross cargo. Commercial Court. 15th May 2008
by Mr Justice Burton : Crown Copyright

Shandong Chenming Paper Holding Ltd v Saga Forest Carriers INTL AS [2008] APP.L.R. 05/14
Default judgement : Set aside : Reasonable chance of establishing a defence that claim time barred under the contract : 1 year under Hague-Visby Rules. Commercial Court. 14th May 2008
by Mr Justice Walker : Crown Copyright

Sharab v HRH Prince Al-Waleed Bin Talal Bin Abdal-Aziz Al-Saud [2008] APP.L.R. 07/31
Whether court should decline jurisdiction or rule that Libya the most appropriate forum. Held : In the interests of justice issue of writ out of jurisdiction granted - case should be heard before the High Court. Chancery. 31st July 2008
by John L. Powell Q.C. Crown Copyright

Sheffield United Football Club Ltd v West Ham United Football Club Plc [2008] APP.L.R. 11/26
Application by the Claimant, Sheffield United, for an interim order restraining the Defendant, West Ham, from taking any further steps to pursue an appeal or challenge to an award made by an arbitral tribunal in England other than by way of an application to this Court under the Arbitration Act 1996. Application by West Ham seeking a stay of Sheffield United\'s application. 26th November 2008
by Mr Justice Teare. Crown Copyright

Sheltam Rail Company (Proprietary) Ltd v Mirambo Holdings Ltd [2008] APP.L.R. 04/21
S67 AA 1996 challenge. Notice of discontinuance. Impact on New York enforcement.Notice of discontinuance of challenge to arbitration. New York Convention Award outside UK. Challenge to discontinuance to prevent outstanding issues before English Court being used as a ground for resisting enforcement abroad. Held : Discontinuance permitted subject to assurance that the ground would not be relied upon to prevent foreign enforcing court obtaining jurisdiction. Commercial Court. 21st April 2008.
by Mr Justice Aikens : Crown Copyright

South East Asia Metal Ltd v Zahoor [2008] APP.L.R. 04/29
Evidence admissible on appeal : CPR 52.11(2) Grounds for introducing new evidence on appeal. Ladd v Marshall [1954] 1 WLR 1489 applied : TEST : New evidence to be admissible i) could not have been obtained with reasonable diligence for use at the trial; ii) must be such that it would probably have an important influence on the result of the case; iii) must be apparently credible, though it need not be incontrovertible.CA. 29th April 2008
by MR; Longmore LJ; Lawrence Collins LJ. Crown Copyright

Steamship Mutual Underwriting Association (Bermuda) Ltd v Sulpicio Lines Inc [2008] APP.L.R. 04/04
Anti-suit injunction. P&I cover provided subject to rules, London Arbitration & Jurisidction. Club cancelled membership for breaches of rules - ending cover for two vessels that were lost : Sulpicio commenced action in Phillipines court alleging breach of contract & fraud. Injunction granted. Commercial Court. 4th April 2008
by Mr Justice Walker : Crown Copyright

Stocznia Gdynia SA v Gearbulk Holdings Ltd [2008] APP.L.R. 05/02
S069 AA 1996 – Termination : contractual & repudiation. Distinction between terminating a contract on contract terms and terminating by acceptance of repudiatory breach. United Dominions Trust (Commercial) Ltd v Ennis [1968] 1 QB 54 applied. Commercial Court. 2nd May 2008
by Mr Justice Burton : Crown Copyright

Syska v Vivendi Universal SA [2008] APP.L.R. 10/02
S67 AA 1996 Jurisdiction. Application to set aside award on the grounds that under the governing law the jurisdiction of an arbitral tribunal was revoked upon the defendant entering into bankruptcy. Application failed. Commercial Court. 2nd October 2008
by Mr Justice Christopher Clarke. Crown Copyright

Taylor Woodrow v RMD Kwikform [2008] APP.L.R. 04/17
s14, 32, 45 AA 1996 Challenge : Appointment. Whether a valid notice of arbitration given : unilateral appointment contrary to contract provisions. The so called notice was not unequivocal – a mere enquiry as to whether the other party would insist on arbitration – so arbitration process not commenced – 14 day period to agree appointment not triggered – so unilateral appointment invalid. TCC. 17th April 2008
by Mr Justice Ramsey : Crown Copyright

TJ Brent Ltd v Black & Veatch Consulting Ltd [2008] APP.L.R. 06/13
Cost application for breach of Pre-Action protocol : Held : In order to award costs 1) there must have been a substantial as opposed to mere technical breach 2) the breach must have prevented a potential settlement of the action. Here, the breach was technical - whilst filed prior to a stay to mediation, and hence a valid application - the only objective was to gain an edge in the mediation. Application refused. TCC. 13th June 2008
by Mr Justice Akenhead : Crown Copyright

Tor Corporate AS v. Siopect Group Start Petroleum Corp Ltd [2008] APP.L.R. 01/18
Art 34 Model Law – set aside challenge. Extra Div. Inner House, Court of Session. 18th January 2008
by Lord Macfadyen ; Lord Kingarth; Lord Eassie. Crown Copyright

UBS Ag v HSH Nordbank Ag [2008] APP.L.R. 07/04
Jurisdiction : interpretation of clause - viz whether New York Court or English Court had jurisdiction. Held : New York. Commercial Court. 4th July 2008.
by Mr Justice Walker : Crown Copyright

Underwriting Members of Lloyd\'s Syndicate 980 v Sinco SA [2008] APP.L.R. 07/29
Conflicts : Insurance dispute between underwriters and brokers : Actions in Greeece & UK. Claim for damages for breach of English jurisdiction clause by commencing action in Greece. Commercial Court. 29th July 2008
by Mr Justice Beatson : Crown Copyright

Van Der Giessen-De-Noord Shipbuiilding Division BV v Imtech Marine & Offshore BV [2008] APP.L.R. 11/26
s68 Arbitration Act 1996. Adequacy of reasons. Set aside application. Partially successful. Only two arbitrators appointed. No umpire. Order for appointment of umpire to reconsider the matters set aside. Commercial Court. 26th November 2008.
by Mr Justice Christopher Clarke.

Verity Shipping SA (Owners) v NV Norexa [2008] APP.L.R. 02/13
Anti-suit injunction. Charterparty and bills of lading. Anti-suit refused because it would impact adversely on 3rd party rights – where the third parties were not parties with notice to arbitration proceedings. Commercial Court. 13th February 2008
by Mr. Justice Teare: Crown Copyright

Vitol SA v Capri Marine Ltd [2008] APP.L.R. 02/29
CPR 71.2 Service out of jurisdiction – award debtor. Service out of jurisdiction refused for an order persuant to CPR 71.2 which provides, so far as material: \'(1) A judgment creditor may apply for an order requiring— ... (b) if a judgment debtor is a company or other corporation, an officer of that body, to attend court to provide information about—(i) the judgment debtor\'s means; or (ii) any other matter about which information is needed to enforce a judgment or order.\' Commercial Court. 29th February 2008
by Tomlinson J. Crown Copyright

Watkins v Jones Maidment Wilson (a firm) [2008] APP.L.R. 03/04
Limitation Act : Whether action ran from occurrence of a contingency, bringing action for negligent advice on a construction contract within the limitation period. Held : Action time barred. CA. 4th March 2008
by Arden LJ; Longmore LJ; Thomas LJ. Crown Copyright

West London Pipeline and Storage Ltd v Total UK Ltd No2 [2008] APP.L.R. 07/22
Application for disclosure of post incident accident report produced to satisfy requirements of the Control of Major Accident Hazard Regulations 1999, as amended (COMAH). Held : Document subject to legal privilege - for primary use by lawyers in respect of potential claims and defences. Application refused. Commercial Court. 22nd July 2008
by Mr Justice Beatson : Crown Copyright

West London Pipeline and Storage Ltd v Total UK Ltd No1 [2008] APP.L.R. 06/09
Application for disclosure of extent of insurance cover refused : made no difference to question of liability : only value was to determine whether party worth suing - on par with disclosure of assets for similar purpose. Commercial Court. 9th June 2008
by Mr Justice David Steel : Crown Copyright

West v Wilkinson [2008] APP.L.R. 07/03
Apportionment of liability between 1st & 2nd defendants : Unsuccessful appeal, occasioned because no reasons provided at first instance for equal liability between defendants. If reasons had been provided application to appeal would have failed. CA. 3rd July 2008
by Buxton LJ; Keene LJ; Thomas LJ. Crown Copyright

Westacre Investments Inc v The State-Owned Company Yugoimport SDPR [2008] APP.L.R. 04/21
Time bar : garnishee order – Arbitral Award. Chasing enforcement of arbitral award around the world seeking funds to attach : Whether court would enforce action after 6 years from judgement date : Discretion of court : No extension if claimant sits on his rights - but if he continually attempts enforcement, albeit unsuccessfully - court will extend time. Decision necessary to enable Singapore Court to enforce a UK judgment under reciprocal arrangements. Commercial Court : 21st April 2008
by Mr Justice Tomlinson : Crown Copyright

Youell v La Reunion Aerienne [2008] APP.L.R. 10/22
Jurisdiction challenges : Council Regulation (EC) No. 44/2001 : Whether insurance placed partly in France & partly in England subject to English or French terms and whether French arbitration clause implied into English Policy. Commercial Court. 22nd October 2008
by Mr Justice Tomlinson : Crown Copyright

Our publications are provided in PDF format, in order to view them you will need Adobe's free Acrobat reader. Acrobat reader can be downloaded from Adobe by following the link to your left.

Top of page

    Copyright © NADR 2000, all rights reserved.