Before : His Honour Judge Bird Sitting as a Judge of this Court. Between: -and- Hearing dates: 11 December Approved Judgment

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Before : His Honour Judge Bird Sitting as a Judge of this Court. Between: -and- Hearing dates: 11 December Approved Judgment"

Transcription

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION MANCHESTER DISTRICT REGISTRY MERCANTILE COURT Case No: BA40MA109 Date: 19 January 2016 Before : His Honour Judge Bird Sitting as a Judge of this Court Between: Pencil Hill Limited Claimant -and- US Citta Di Palermo S.p.A Defendant Martin Budworth (instructed by Cassell Moore Solicitors) for the Claimant Thomas Braithwaite (instructed by Couchmans LLP) for the Defendant Hearing dates: 11 December 2015 I direct that pursuant to CPR PD 39A para 6.1 no official shorthand note shall be taken of this Judgment and that copies of this version as handed down may be treated as authentic. HONOUR JUDGE BIRD

2 HIS HONOUR.JUDGE BIRD His Honour Judge Bird: Overview 1. Should a New York Convention arbitration award be enforced in the courts of England and Wales if it includes an award in respect of a penalty? 2. The relevant contracts entered into by the parties relate to the sale of financial rights deriving from "registration rights" of a football player called Paulo Dybala. Pencil Hill Limited had acquired the rights from a Spanish football club, Cordoba, and sold them on to an Italian football club, Palermo for a total price of 10,000,000 Euros. 3. By a written contract dated 27 April2012 Palermo agreed to pay Pencil Hill Limited a total of 6,720,000 Euros in 2 instalments of 3,360,000 Euros on certain fixed dates. A further 1,000,000 Euros became due under an agreement made in August Clause 4 of the 27 April contract read as follows: "In the case [Palermo] fails to pay any of the instalment agreed, then, all the remaining amounts shall become due and as penalty [Palermo] will have to pay an amount equal to the amount pending IE [Palermo] will pay the double of the pending amount at the moment of the fail on the payment". 5. Clause 6 read as follows: "any question arise from this agreement will be submitted to the [Court of Arbitration for Sport ("CAS")] according to Swiss Private law. The file shall be conducted in English and decided by a panel composed bythree members". 6. The sum of 6,720,000 Euros was not paid. Procedural History 7. On 4 July 2013 Pencil Hill Limited filed an arbitration request at CAS. The application was heard on 26 March The claim was for 6,720,000 Euros under the 27 April contract together with the clause 4 penalty of a further 6,720,000 Euros and the 1,000,000 Euros due under the separate August agreement. 8. On 26 August 2014 CAS published its award. It directed that Palermo pay Pencil Hill Limited 9,400,000 Euros plus interest. That sum comprised the 1,000,000 Euros due under the August agreement, the 6,720,000 Euros due under the April agreement and the reduced additional sum (in place of the penalty) of 1,680,000 Euros. The reduced additional sum represented 25% of the penalty claimed. 9. In reducing the amount of the penalty, the Arbitral Panel referred to Article of the Swiss Code of Obligations, which provides that (in its English translation) "the judge must reduce a contractual penalty considered excessive". I note in passing, that injanuary 1978 the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe recommended a number of common principles should apply to penalty clauses throughout Europe, including a power for the court to reduce the penalty "when it is manifestly excessive" (see paragraph 37 of Cavendish Square v Makdessi referred to below). At paragraph 189 of the Award the Panel expressed the view that the original penalty of 6,720,000 Euros was "disproportionate and unfair".

3 HIS UONOUR.IUUGE 811W 10. On 3 November 2014 Palermo appealed the arbitration award to the superv1smg, or curial, court the "Tribunal Federal" in Lausanne. Its decision was published on 21 May The reduced penalty was upheld. The Issue 11. The only issue before me is whether I should refuse to allow enforcement of 1,680,000 Euros of the award on the ground that to do so would be contrary to public policy. Relevant Law 12. Section 103 of the Arbitration Act 1996 deals with enforcement in the English courts. It is clear that there is a general duty on the English courts to enforce a New York Convention award, subject to certain limited exceptions set out at section 103(2)(a) to (e), and 103(3). Enforcement may be refused under subsection (3) "if it would be contrary to public policy to recognise or enforce the award". 13. Section 103 reflects national obligations assumed as a signatory to the Convention. The obligations are set out at Article V of the Convention. (see Nigerian National Petroleum Corp. v JPCO ( Nigeria) Ltd. [2008] EWCA Civ 1157 At para.6). 14. The Arbitration Act 1996 is founded on a number of principles set out at section 1. The Act is to be construed with those principles in mind. They include at section 1(b): "the parties should be free to agree how their disputes are resolved, subject only to such safeguards as necessary in the public interest" 15. Before dealing briefly with the authorities on the point in issue, I should deal with the views of the authors of the leading text books. Merkin, in a footnote to paragraph notes that in considering refusal it is English public policy that is at stake, not the public policy of any other country. The parties accepted that is the case and I need say no more about it. In the same paragraph Merkin notes that for enforcement to be refused on the grounds of public policy, the award must "fundamentally offend the most basic and explicit principles of justice and fairness". Having referred to authority, the authors go on to say this: "It follows from these principles that a court may not refuse on public policy grounds to enforce an award which is erroneous in law or reaches a conclusion which the court would not itself have reached...". 16. In Deutsche Schachlbau und Tiefbohrgeselischaft mbh v Ras at-khaimah National Oil Co. [1987] 2 Lloyds Rep 246, Sir John Donaldson MR put it in this way: "Considerations of public policy can never be exhaustively defined, but they should be approached with extreme caution. As Burrough J. remarked in Richardson v. Mellish (1824) 2 Bing. 229, 252, "It is never argued at all, but when other points fail." It has to be shown that there is some element of illegality or that the enforcement of the award would be clearly injurious to the public good or, possibly, that enforcement would be wholly offensive to the ordinary reasonable and fully informed member of the public on whose behalf the powers of the state are exercised." 17. In Westacre Investments Inc. v Jugoimport-SDPR Holding Co and others [1999] 1 All ER (Comm) 865, it was said that the underlying contract was one which would be contrary to the public policy of England with the result that enforcement should be refused. The parties had chosen Swiss law as the governing law of the contract and the arbitration seat

4 His Honour Judge Bird PencilHill v Palermo was Switzerland with the Swiss Courts as the curial courts. Absent bribery, Swiss law did not regard the contract as contrary to public policy. 18. Waller LJ, referring to Lemenda Trading Co. v African Middle East Petroleum. Co Ltd [1988] 1 All ER 513, noted that "there are some rules of public policy which if infringed will lead to non-enforcement by the English Court whatever their proper law and wherever their place of performance". He cited the judgment of Phillips J in that case at page 521. There, having referred to attempts to categorise the various heads of public policy capable of invalidating contracts Phillips J held that where a contract infringes a "universal principle of morality" it would not be enforced by the English courts no matter what its governing law or the law of the place of performance might be. Waller U noted that Colman J at first instance had described such types of agreement as based on "universally condemned activities" including "terrorism, drug trafficking, prostitution or paedophilia". 19. The position is different if the public policy arises, not by the application of these universal principles but rather by the application of "domestic principles". Then, enforcement of a contract performed out of the jurisdiction will not necessarily be refused. In Westacre, Waller U (at 877h-j) decided that if a contract fell into this category it would need to be established that performance was contrary to the public policy of the place of performance before the English Courts would refuse to enforce it. Waller U noted that "It is legitimate to conclude that there is nothing which offends English public policy if an arbitral tribunal enforces a contract which does not offend the domestic public policy under either the proper law of the contract or its curial law, even if English domestic public policy might have taken a different view" 20. In Omnium de Traitement et de valorisation SA v Hilmarton Limited a decision of 25 May 1999 (1998 Folio No.1003), Walker J noted that the English courts would refuse to give effect to the contract which gave rise to the arbitration award. He pointed out that he was not adjudicating upon the underlying contract, rather he was deciding whether an arbitration award should be enforced in England. There the Judge noted that the parties had chosen Swiss Law to govern their relationship and that as a matter of Swiss Law the agreement was not unlawful. 21. Walker J felt the fact that the parties had agreed upon Swiss Law as the governing law and that Swiss law accepted the underlying contract as good was an important factor. As he put it: "...the fact that English law would or might have arrived at a different result is nothing to the point. Indeed the reason for the different result is that Swiss law is different from English Law and the parties chose Swiss Law and Swiss arbitration. If anything, this consideration dictates (as a matter of public policy of the upholding of international arbitral awards) that the Award should be enforced". 22. From the New Zealand case of Amaltal Corporation Ltd. V Maruha (NZ) Corporation Ltd Judgment delivered on 11 March 2004 in the New Zealand Court of Appeal) it can be seen that the international community has adopted the same, or at least a very similar, approach. At paragraphs 44 and 55 of the decision, Blanchard J, delivering the judgment of the Court, noted that the courts of the United States and of Canada have adopted a similarly "narrow reading" of the right to refuse enforcement on public policy grounds. Where enforcement would breach the rules (in Canada) of "essential morality" or (in the United States) the "most basic notions of morality and justice" enforcement will be refused.

5 HIS HONOUR JUDGE BIRD 23. In that case the Court of Appeal in New Zealand was concerned with a penalty clause. At paragraph 56 it posed the rhetorical question: is the unenforceability of a penalty clause to be regarded as falling foul of fundamental concepts of law and justice? It concluded that it was not. At paragraph 59 the rule against penalties was described as "not a rule which can properly be characterised as so fundamental as to constitute "public policy" in the sense in which those words have been used in [the New Zealand equivalent of section 103(3) of the 1996 Act]." The New Zealand court took the view that the law of penalties owed its development to equity and was not a matter of "public policy". 24. I was referred to Cavendish Square Holding BV v Makdessi [2015] UKSC 67. The decision deals with the circumstances in which the rule against penalties is to be applied. It explains in the clearest terms that the rule against the enforcement of penalties is a rule based on public policy. Lord Neuberger, Lord Sumption and Lord Carnworth note (at paragraph 31 and 32) that the law relating to penalties "has become the prisoner of artificial categorisation, itself the result of unsatisfactory distinctions: between a penalty and genuine pre-estimate of loss, and between a genuine pre-estimate of loss and a deterrent....[t]he real question when a contractual provision is challenged as a penalty is whether it is penal, not whether it is a pre-estimate of loss. These are not natural opposites or mutually exclusive categories...the true test is whether the impugned provision is a secondary obligation which imposes a detriment on the contract breaker out of all proportion to any legitimate interest of the innocent party in the enforcement of the primary obligation. The innocent party can have no proper interest in simply punishing the defaulter." 25. Lord Hodge (with whom Lord Toulson agreed) described the correct test for a penalty as "whether the sum or remedy stipulated as a consequence of a breach of contract is exorbitant or unconscionable when regard is had to the innocent party's interest in the performance of the contract". Submissions 26. Mr Braithwaite who appears for Palermo accepts (as he must) that the test to be applied in deciding whether to decline to enforce is "a rigorous one". His argument is that the nature of the penal clause in the present case is "sufficiently injurious" to justify refusal. He submits that Makdessi makes it clear that the rule against penalties is firmly a matter of public policy and that, even after reduction of the amount of the penalty by the arbitral body following curial review, there remains a penalty which the courts of England should not enforce. 27. Mr Braithwaite referred also to section 5 of the Protection of Trading Interests Act 1980, described by Lord Hodge in the Outer House in Service Temp. Inc v MacLeod 2014 SLT 375 as a "remarkable Act". Lord Hodge (at paragraph 33) expressed the view that in enacting the statute, Parliament had "sought to discourage what is considered to be the exorbitant effects of United States anti-trust laws. The Act is concerned not only with the extra territorial effect of such laws but also with preventing the recovery of multiple damages". Lord Hodge went on to say that, even if the Act did not exist: "the common law, bolstered by [Article 1 of the First Protocol of the European Convention on Human rights] would have rendered unenforceable a claim for multiple damages". I need not set out the substance of the Act because the submission was not based on it, rather it was based on what Lord Hodge said the common law would do in the absence of the Act. The submission was that the view adopted by Lord Hodge strengthened Palermo's argument.

6 IUS HONOUR JUDGE UIR.D Approved.Judgment In short, the award in the present case was a simple award of multiple damages which ought not to be enforced. 28. Dealing with Amaltel in the New Zealand Court of Appeal, Mr Braithwaite submitted, given the Supreme Court's decision in Makdessi that the case was wrongly decided. It was now clear that the rule against penalties was a matter of public policy and not a mere rule of equity. 29. Mr Budworth submits that the granting of permission to enforce a New York convention award involves a balance between, on the one hand, the desirability of finality in international arbitration and on the other, public policy considerations concerning penalties. He submits that there is a hierarchy of public policy considerations and that the public policy represented here by the domestic imperative to refuse to enforce penalty provisions was not sufficient to tip the balance against enforcement. He relies on the fact that the curial court has upheld an adjustment of the penalty here so that, in the eyes of that court, the "penalty" is no longer "excessive". He points out that the parties have agreed upon a governing law which would permit (and which resulted in) a rewriting of the penalty clause and have agreed that disputes between them should be dealt with by arbitration in the same jurisdiction. Discussion 30. I have come to the conclusion that the award should be enforced in its entirety. The authorities are clear. There is a strong leaning towards the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards and the circumstances in which the English Court may refuse enforcement are narrow. I am satisfied that the important public policy against enforcement of penalty clauses is not sufficient to permit me to refuse enforcement. The rule does not in my judgment protect a "universal principle of morality". It is not so clearly "injurious to the public good" that enforcement should, without more, be refused. That being the case, the position under the governing law as applied by the curial court must be considered. It is in my judgment particularly important in the present case to note that the parties chose a governing law which empowers its courts to interfere with a penalty by reducing it. 31. In the present case the governing law applied by the CAS and the curial court recognised the relevant payment obligation as a penalty. CAS exercised its power to vary and reduce the payment obligation so that the obligation was no longer considered to be "excessive". The curial court upheld the reduction. The altered obligation was no longer regarded by the governing law as objectionable. 32. In my judgment the public policy of upholding international arbitral awards, as Walker 1 held in Omnium, outweighs the public policy of refusing to enforce penalty clauses. The scales are tipped heavily in favour of enforcement. 33. The decision in Ameltel in my judgment remains good even in the light of Makdessi. The Court of Appeal in New Zealand was doing no more than applying the universal principles set out, in particular, in the Deutsche Schachtbau case. 34. In my judgment there is a second strong reason to enforce. In the eyes of Swiss law it seems to me that the variation of the payment obligation changed the nature of the obligation. What had been a penalty (an excessive payment) was changed into a non penalty (a non excessive payment). The position then is not that Swiss law upheld a

7 His Honour Judge Bird Approved Judgement penalty, rather it is that Swiss law removed a penalty and replaced it with an obligation to pay a sum it regarded (in the words of Lord Hodge in Magdassi ) as neither exorbitant nor unconscionable. As this Court is (as Walker J put it in Omnium) not adjudicating upon the underlying contract, it is easy to see that the decision of the curial court- the court chosen by the parties applying the law chosen by the parties-should be respected. 35. Mr Budworth raised an estoppel argument. In my view it adds nothing but is simply another way of describing the weight to be attached to the decision of the curial court. Further points 36. The skeleton arguments raised 2 further points. Each dealt with the form of the order made by His Honour Judge Raynor QC. One point related to the reference to sterling in the order, the other to interest. Having heard Mr Braithwaite's submissions on the points Mr Budworth made no argument against them. Conclusion 37. The application to set aside the order of His Honour Judge Raynor QC is refused. 38. For the sake of clarity I will make a fresh order. The parties should use their best endeavours to agree its terms. It should make no reference to sterling or to interest. The order will not be an entry of judgment in a monetary sum. I am confident, given the sensible, efficient and good natured way in which the hearing before me progressed that an order can be agreed. If my confidence is misplaced I will decide on the form of order at the handing down of this judgment. I am grateful to both counsel for their focussed and helpful submissions in this matter. -end-

8

ENFORCEMENT OF FOREIGN ARBITRATION AWARDS

ENFORCEMENT OF FOREIGN ARBITRATION AWARDS ARBITRATION: WHAT IN-HOUSE LAWYERS NEED TO KNOW ENFORCEMENT OF FOREIGN ARBITRATION AWARDS MARCH 2016 IN THIS BRIEFING WE EXAMINE: THE SCOPE OF THE NEW YORK CONVENTION FORMALITIES FOR ENFORCEMENT GROUNDS

More information

Penalty Clauses: What is left? Jonathan Owen

Penalty Clauses: What is left? Jonathan Owen Penalty Clauses: What is left? Jonathan Owen The history of the issue 1. Every undergraduate law student has had to grapple with the common law rule against penalty clauses in contracts, in the sense of

More information

Enforceability of take-or-pay provisions in English law contracts resolved

Enforceability of take-or-pay provisions in English law contracts resolved Journal of Energy & Natural Resources Law, 2016 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02646811.2016.1164554 Enforceability of take-or-pay provisions in English law contracts resolved Ben Holland is a partner in the

More information

The Commencement Date was 1/1/14 and the Time for Completion was 18 months.

The Commencement Date was 1/1/14 and the Time for Completion was 18 months. Scenario for Edinburgh Working Weekend WorldTech is a multinational IT corporation. It entered into a contract with ConstructIT for the construction of a key next-generation datacentre facility in North

More information

Before : MR JUSTICE KNOWLES CBE Between : (1) C1 (2) C2 (3) C3. - and

Before : MR JUSTICE KNOWLES CBE Between : (1) C1 (2) C2 (3) C3. - and Neutral Citation Number: [2016] EWHC 1893 (Comm) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION COMMERCIAL COURT Case No: CL-2015-000762 Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL Date: 29/07/2016

More information

Differences between the Civil and Common Law: Part 2: Delay Damages and Taking-Over. Cremona Cotovelea Nina Tsaturova Jeremy Glover

Differences between the Civil and Common Law: Part 2: Delay Damages and Taking-Over. Cremona Cotovelea Nina Tsaturova Jeremy Glover Differences between the Civil and Common Law: Part 2: Delay Damages and Taking-Over Cremona Cotovelea Nina Tsaturova Jeremy Glover Sub-Clause 10.1: Taking Over The Engineer shall, within 28 days after

More information

Decision of the. Dispute Resolution Chamber

Decision of the. Dispute Resolution Chamber Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 13 July 2017, in the following composition: Geoff Thompson (England), Chairman Mario Gallavotti (Italy), member Theo van Seggelen

More information

Before : MR. JUSTICE EDWARDS-STUART Between :

Before : MR. JUSTICE EDWARDS-STUART Between : Neutral Citation Number: [2014] EWHC 4006 (TCC) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN S BENCH DIVISION TECHNOLOGY AND CONSTRUCTION COURT Case No: HT-2014-000022 (Formerly HT-14-372) Royal Courts of Justice

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE MONTSERRAT CIRCUIT (CIVIL) A.D GALLOWAY HARDWARE & BUILDING MATERIALS LTD

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE MONTSERRAT CIRCUIT (CIVIL) A.D GALLOWAY HARDWARE & BUILDING MATERIALS LTD THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT Claim No. MNIHCV2014/0024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE MONTSERRAT CIRCUIT (CIVIL) A.D. 2014 Between: DANTZLER INC. and GALLOWAY HARDWARE & BUILDING MATERIALS LTD Claimant

More information

Panel: Mr Mark Hovell (England), President; Mr Olivier Carrard (Switzerland); Mr Hendrik Kesler (The Netherlands)

Panel: Mr Mark Hovell (England), President; Mr Olivier Carrard (Switzerland); Mr Hendrik Kesler (The Netherlands) Tribunal Arbitral du Sport Court of Arbitration for Sport Arbitration CAS 2010/A/2317 & CAS 2011/A/2323 Panel: Mr Mark Hovell (England), President; Mr Olivier Carrard (Switzerland); Mr Hendrik Kesler (The

More information

Before : The Honourable Mr Justice Popplewell Between :

Before : The Honourable Mr Justice Popplewell Between : Neutral Citation Number: 2015 EWHC 2542 (Comm) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION COMMERCIAL COURT Case No: CL-2014-000070 Royal Courts of Justice, Rolls Building Fetter Lane, London,

More information

SECTION 44, FREEZING INJUNCTIONS AND FOREIGN ARBITRATIONS: LIMITATIONS ON JURISDICTION

SECTION 44, FREEZING INJUNCTIONS AND FOREIGN ARBITRATIONS: LIMITATIONS ON JURISDICTION 34 [2009] Int. A.L.R.: SECTION 44, FREEZING INJUNCTIONS AND FOREIGN ARBITRATIONS: LIMITATIONS ON JURISDICTION SECTION 44, FREEZING INJUNCTIONS AND FOREIGN ARBITRATIONS: LIMITATIONS ON JURISDICTION PHILIPPA

More information

Oil & Gas JOA Defaults: Enforcing Forfeiture Clauses after the Cavendish Square Decision

Oil & Gas JOA Defaults: Enforcing Forfeiture Clauses after the Cavendish Square Decision Oil & Gas JOA Defaults: Enforcing Forfeiture Clauses after the Cavendish Square Decision February 2016 The continuing decline in oil & gas prices has led to increasing numbers of defaults under oil & gas

More information

THE INTERPRETATION OF EXCLUSION CLAUSES

THE INTERPRETATION OF EXCLUSION CLAUSES BRIEFING THE INTERPRETATION OF EXCLUSION CLAUSES MAY 2016 LITERAL AND NATURAL MEANING IS OF PRIMARY IMPORTANCE COMMERCIALITY MAY BE CONSIDERED THE COURT MAY ALSO CONSIDER APPLICATION OF THE CONTRA PROFERENTEM

More information

Before : HIS HONOUR JUDGE PLATTS Between : - and -

Before : HIS HONOUR JUDGE PLATTS Between : - and - IN THE MANCHESTER COUNTY COURT Case No: 2YJ60324 1, Bridge Street West Manchester M60 9DJ Date: 29/11/2012 Before : HIS HONOUR JUDGE PLATTS - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Between : MRS THAZEER

More information

NEC3: UNCERTAINTY OF TERMS - ARE YOU SURE?

NEC3: UNCERTAINTY OF TERMS - ARE YOU SURE? NEC3: UNCERTAINTY OF TERMS - ARE YOU SURE? ALEX EDWARDS Senior Consultant, Leeds From time to time, contracts are drafted and entered into, where some of the terms are uncertain and, unfortunately, often

More information

ELA ARBITRATION AND ADR GROUP. Issues arising from Brussels I Recast and Rome I

ELA ARBITRATION AND ADR GROUP. Issues arising from Brussels I Recast and Rome I ELA ARBITRATION AND ADR GROUP Issues arising from Brussels I Recast and Rome I Question 1 Arbitration and Brussels I Recast: Do we agree that that arbitration is outside Brussels I and that the Regulations

More information

Before: JUSTICE ANDREW BAKER (In Private) - and - ANONYMISATION APPLIES

Before: JUSTICE ANDREW BAKER (In Private) - and - ANONYMISATION APPLIES If this Transcript is to be reported or published, there is a requirement to ensure that no reporting restriction will be breached. This is particularly important in relation to any case involving a sexual

More information

Before : - and - THE HIGH COMMISSION OF BRUNEI DARUSSALAM

Before : - and - THE HIGH COMMISSION OF BRUNEI DARUSSALAM Neutral Citation Number: [2014] EWCA Civ 1521 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN S BENCH DIVISION The Honourable Mr Justice Bean QB20130421 Case No:

More information

Before: HIS HONOUR JUDGE GOSNELL Between: ATV Automotive & Industrial Components (UK) Ltd (3)

Before: HIS HONOUR JUDGE GOSNELL Between: ATV Automotive & Industrial Components (UK) Ltd (3) IN THE LEEDS COUNTY COURT Case No: D08YX820 The Combined Court Centre, Oxford Row, Leeds Before: Between: Date: 2 July 2018 Roy Richardson Dalus - and - Lear Corporation (Nottingham) Limited (1) Claimant

More information

JUDGMENT. Honourable Attorney General and another (Appellants) v Isaac (Respondent) (Antigua and Barbuda)

JUDGMENT. Honourable Attorney General and another (Appellants) v Isaac (Respondent) (Antigua and Barbuda) Easter Term [2018] UKPC 11 Privy Council Appeal No 0077 of 2016 JUDGMENT Honourable Attorney General and another (Appellants) v Isaac (Respondent) (Antigua and Barbuda) From the Court of Appeal of the

More information

IMPROVING PAYMENT PRACTICES IN THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY

IMPROVING PAYMENT PRACTICES IN THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY IMPROVING PAYMENT PRACTICES IN THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY Report of the DTI s post-consultation event held in London on 14th February 2006 On Valentine s Day 2006, the Right Honourable Alun Michael MP compared

More information

Arbitration CAS 2017/A/5374 Jaroslaw Kolakowski v. Daniel Quintana Sosa, award of 10 April 2018

Arbitration CAS 2017/A/5374 Jaroslaw Kolakowski v. Daniel Quintana Sosa, award of 10 April 2018 Tribunal Arbitral du Sport Court of Arbitration for Sport Arbitration award of 10 April 2018 Panel: Mr Mark Hovell (United Kingdom), President; Mr Fabio Iudica (Italy); Mr João Nogueira da Rocha (Portugal)

More information

Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber

Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 2 November 2007, in the following composition: ALOULOU Slim (Tunisia), Chairman DIDULICA John (Australia), member MOVILLA Gerardo

More information

Malik v Fassenfelt [2013] EWCA Civ 798: The Implications for Private Landlords and Landowners

Malik v Fassenfelt [2013] EWCA Civ 798: The Implications for Private Landlords and Landowners Introduction Malik v Fassenfelt [2013] EWCA Civ 798: The Implications for Private Landlords and Landowners Matthew Brown, Guildhall Chambers 1 1. Historically it was rare for a judgment in the field of

More information

Jurisdictional Issues Relating to Challenges and the New York Convention Fictions, Failures and Finality a Choice of Remedies

Jurisdictional Issues Relating to Challenges and the New York Convention Fictions, Failures and Finality a Choice of Remedies 25 Jurisdictional Issues Relating to Challenges and the New York Convention Fictions, Failures and Finality a Choice of Remedies by Hilary Heilbron Q.C.* ABSTRACT The Article examines the option of a party

More information

JUDGMENT. IPCO (Nigeria) Limited (Respondent) v Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (Appellant)

JUDGMENT. IPCO (Nigeria) Limited (Respondent) v Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (Appellant) Hilary Term [2017] UKSC 16 On appeals from: [2015] EWCA Civ 1144 and 1145 JUDGMENT IPCO (Nigeria) Limited (Respondent) v Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (Appellant) before Lord Mance Lord Clarke

More information

Before : THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE FLAUX Between : WEST TANKERS INC

Before : THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE FLAUX Between : WEST TANKERS INC Neutral Citation Number: [2012] EWHC 854 (Comm) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION COMMERCIAL COURT Case No: 2011 FOLIO 564 Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL Date: 04/04/2012

More information

Arbitration: Enforcement v Sovereign Immunity a clash of policy

Arbitration: Enforcement v Sovereign Immunity a clash of policy Arbitration: Enforcement v Sovereign Immunity a clash of policy Presented by Hermione Rose Williams Advocates BVI Outline: A talk which examines the tension between the enforcement of arbitral awards and

More information

Before : LORD JUSTICE WALLER Vice-President of the Court of Appeal, Civil Division

Before : LORD JUSTICE WALLER Vice-President of the Court of Appeal, Civil Division Neutral Citation Number: [2009] EWCA Civ 1397 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM QUEEN S BENCH DIVISION COMMERCIAL COURT Mrs Justice Gloster [2009] EWHC 196 (Comm) Before : Case No:

More information

Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation v IPCO (Nigeria) Ltd [2008] APP.L.R. 10/21

Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation v IPCO (Nigeria) Ltd [2008] APP.L.R. 10/21 CA on appeal from QBD (Mr Justice Tomlinson) before Tuckey LJ; Wall LJ; Rimer LJ. 21 st October 2008. Lord Justice Tuckey: 1. Can part of a New York Convention arbitration award be enforced? How should

More information

IN THE UPPER TRIBUNAL. R (on the application of RA) v Secretary of State for the Home Department IJR [2015] UKUT (IAC) BEFORE

IN THE UPPER TRIBUNAL. R (on the application of RA) v Secretary of State for the Home Department IJR [2015] UKUT (IAC) BEFORE IN THE UPPER TRIBUNAL R (on the application of RA) v Secretary of State for the Home Department IJR [2015] UKUT 00292 (IAC) Field House London BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE CRANSTON UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE

More information

IN THE UPPER TRIBUNAL BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE CRANSTON UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE REEDS. Between THE QUEEN ON THE APPLICATION OF RA.

IN THE UPPER TRIBUNAL BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE CRANSTON UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE REEDS. Between THE QUEEN ON THE APPLICATION OF RA. IAC-FH-CK-V1 IN THE UPPER TRIBUNAL JR/2277/2015 Field House, Breams Buildings London EC4A 1WR 13 April 2015 BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE CRANSTON UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE REEDS Between THE QUEEN ON THE

More information

Supreme Court considers recoverability of 1.6m ATE premium for appeal in 5780 claim

Supreme Court considers recoverability of 1.6m ATE premium for appeal in 5780 claim Supreme Court considers recoverability of 1.6m ATE premium for appeal in 5780 claim Plevin v. Paragon Personal Finance Limited (No 3) UKSC 2014/0037 Article by David Bowden Executive speed read summary

More information

ARBITRAL AWARD BASKETBALL ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL (BAT)

ARBITRAL AWARD BASKETBALL ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL (BAT) ARBITRAL AWARD by the BASKETBALL ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL (BAT) Mr. Raj Parker in the arbitration proceedings between Interperformances, Inc., Via degli Aceri 14, 47892 Gualdicciolo, Republic of San Marino represented

More information

Before : HIS HONOUR JUDGE ROBINSON Between :

Before : HIS HONOUR JUDGE ROBINSON Between : IN THE COUNTY COURT AT SHEFFIELD On Appeal from District Judge Bellamy Case No: 2 YK 74402 Sheffield Appeal Hearing Centre Sheffield Combined Court Centre 50 West Bar Sheffield Date: 29 September 2014

More information

B e f o r e: MRS JUSTICE LANG. Between: THE QUEEN ON THE APPLICATION OF DEAN Claimant

B e f o r e: MRS JUSTICE LANG. Between: THE QUEEN ON THE APPLICATION OF DEAN Claimant Neutral Citation Number: [2016] EWHC 3775 (Admin) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT CO/4951/2016 Royal Courts of Justice Strand London WC2A 2LL Thursday, 15 December

More information

In the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber)

In the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) In the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) R (on the application of Onowu) v First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) (extension of time for appealing: principles) IJR [2016] UKUT

More information

Nare (evidence by electronic means) Zimbabwe [2011] UKUT (IAC) THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Before

Nare (evidence by electronic means) Zimbabwe [2011] UKUT (IAC) THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Before Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Nare (evidence by electronic means) Zimbabwe [2011] UKUT 00443 (IAC) THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at North Shields On 6 May 2011 Determination Promulgated

More information

Lawn Tennis Association Limited: Disciplinary Code Effective 20 September 2016

Lawn Tennis Association Limited: Disciplinary Code Effective 20 September 2016 Lawn Tennis Association Limited: Disciplinary Code Effective 20 September 2016 Index 1. Jurisdiction and Powers 1 2. Misconduct 2 3. Interim Suspension 3 4. Summary Procedure 3 5. Full Disciplinary Procedure

More information

Proper law of the arbitration agreement how does it fit. with the rest of the contract? Professor Phillip Capper

Proper law of the arbitration agreement how does it fit. with the rest of the contract? Professor Phillip Capper Proper law of the arbitration agreement how does it fit with the rest of the contract? BIICL Fifteenth Annual Review of the Arbitration Act 1996 19 April 2012 Professor Phillip Capper What is the Issue?

More information

IN THE UPPER TRIBUNAL

IN THE UPPER TRIBUNAL IN THE UPPER TRIBUNAL R (on the application of JM) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Statelessness: Part 14 of HC 395) IJR [2015] UKUT 00676 (IAC) Field House London BEFORE UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE

More information

EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL FLEETBANK HOUSE, 2-6 SALISBURY SQUARE, LONDON EC4Y 8AE

EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL FLEETBANK HOUSE, 2-6 SALISBURY SQUARE, LONDON EC4Y 8AE Appeal No. UKEAT/0187/16/DA EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL FLEETBANK HOUSE, 2-6 SALISBURY SQUARE, LONDON EC4Y 8AE At the Tribunal On 13 December 2016 Before THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MITTING (SITTING ALONE)

More information

New South Wales Supreme Court

New South Wales Supreme Court State Crest New South Wales Supreme Court CITATION : HEARING DATE(S) : JUDGMENT DATE : JURISDICTION: CORVETINA TECHNOLOGY LTD v CLOUGH ENGINEERING LTD [2004] NSWSC 700 revised - 17/08/2004 29/07/2004 (judgment

More information

Practice Guideline 9: Guideline for Arbitrators on Making Orders Relating to the Costs of the Arbitration

Practice Guideline 9: Guideline for Arbitrators on Making Orders Relating to the Costs of the Arbitration Practice Guideline 9: Guideline for Arbitrators on Making Orders Relating to the Costs of the Arbitration 1. Introduction 1.1 One of the most difficult and important functions which an arbitrator has to

More information

UK: Engineering, Procurement & Construction Briefing

UK: Engineering, Procurement & Construction Briefing UK: Engineering, Procurement & Construction Briefing May 2013 Contents Introduction 01 Liquidated damages vs penalty 01 causes a clear cut dichotomy? Varying the construction methods 03 to catch up how

More information

Penalty Clauses under Brazilian Law: Is there a common ground with the criteria set forth by Cavendish Square v. Makdessi?

Penalty Clauses under Brazilian Law: Is there a common ground with the criteria set forth by Cavendish Square v. Makdessi? Penalty Clauses under Brazilian Law: Is there a common ground with the criteria set forth by Cavendish Square v. Makdessi? Thiago Moreira Caio Lucas Gabra 1. Introduction Although extensively debated by

More information

The Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act

The Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act 1 ENFORCEMENT OF FOREIGN JUDGMENTS c. E-9.121 The Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act Chapter E-9.121 of the Statutes of Saskatchewan, 2005 (effective April 19, 2006), as amended by the Statutes of Saskatchewan,

More information

Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber

Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 27 February 2014, in the following composition: Geoff Thompson (England), Chairman Todd Durbin (USA) Mohamed Al Saikhan (Saudi

More information

Common law reasoning and institutions

Common law reasoning and institutions Common law reasoning and institutions England and Wales Common law reasoning and institutions I. The English legal system and the common law tradition II. Courts, tribunals and other decision-making bodies

More information

Anti-suit Injunctions: Expanding Protection for Arbitration under English Law

Anti-suit Injunctions: Expanding Protection for Arbitration under English Law 169 Anti-suit Injunctions: Expanding Protection for Arbitration under English Law Jamie Maples and Tim Goldfarb* Introduction Where parties have agreed to resolve a particular dispute through arbitration,

More information

Arbitration CAS 2015/A/4333 MKS Cracovia SSA v. Bojan Puzigaca & Féderation Internationale de Football Association (FIFA), award of 10 April 2017

Arbitration CAS 2015/A/4333 MKS Cracovia SSA v. Bojan Puzigaca & Féderation Internationale de Football Association (FIFA), award of 10 April 2017 Tribunal Arbitral du Sport Court of Arbitration for Sport Arbitration CAS 2015/A/4333 MKS Cracovia SSA v. Bojan Puzigaca & Féderation Internationale de Football Association (FIFA), Panel: Mr Patrick Lafranchi

More information

Before : MR. JUSTICE TEARE Between :

Before : MR. JUSTICE TEARE Between : Neutral Citation Number: [2015] EWHC 3143 (QB) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION MERCANTILE COURT Case No: LM-2014-000084 Royal Courts of Justice Rolls Building, 7 Rolls Buildings Fetter

More information

Axa Re v Ace Global Markets Ltd. [2006] APP.L.R. 01/20

Axa Re v Ace Global Markets Ltd. [2006] APP.L.R. 01/20 JUDGMENT : MRS JUSTICE GLOSTER: Commercial Court. 20 th January 2006 1. This is an application by the claimant reinsurer, Axa Re ("Axa"), for a declaration under section 72(1)(a) of the Arbitration Act

More information

Supreme Court rules that paying party has to pay 562k success fee and ATE premium for appeal started after LASPO commencement

Supreme Court rules that paying party has to pay 562k success fee and ATE premium for appeal started after LASPO commencement Supreme Court rules that paying party has to pay 562k success fee and ATE premium for appeal started after LASPO commencement Plevin v. Paragon Personal Finance Limited (No 3) [2017] UKSC 23 Article by

More information

JUDGMENT. Eclipse Film Partners No 35 LLP (Appellant) v Commissioners for Her Majesty s Revenue and Customs (Respondent)

JUDGMENT. Eclipse Film Partners No 35 LLP (Appellant) v Commissioners for Her Majesty s Revenue and Customs (Respondent) Easter Term [2016] UKSC 24 On appeals from: [2014] EWCA Civ 184 JUDGMENT Eclipse Film Partners No 35 LLP (Appellant) v Commissioners for Her Majesty s Revenue and Customs (Respondent) before Lord Neuberger,

More information

Arbitration Act CHAPTER Part I. Arbitration pursuant to an arbitration agreement. Introductory

Arbitration Act CHAPTER Part I. Arbitration pursuant to an arbitration agreement. Introductory Arbitration Act 1996 1996 CHAPTER 23 1 Part I Arbitration pursuant to an arbitration agreement Introductory 1. General principles. 2. Scope of application of provisions. 3. The seat of the arbitration.

More information

JUDGMENT. HM Inspector of Health and Safety (Appellant) v Chevron North Sea Limited (Respondent) (Scotland)

JUDGMENT. HM Inspector of Health and Safety (Appellant) v Chevron North Sea Limited (Respondent) (Scotland) Hilary Term [2018] UKSC 7 On appeal from: [2016] CSIH 29 JUDGMENT HM Inspector of Health and Safety (Appellant) v Chevron North Sea Limited (Respondent) (Scotland) before Lord Mance, Deputy President Lord

More information

Cuthbert v Gair (t/a The Bowes Manor Equestrian Centre) [2008] APP.L.R. 09/03

Cuthbert v Gair (t/a The Bowes Manor Equestrian Centre) [2008] APP.L.R. 09/03 JUDGMENT : Master Haworth : Costs Court. 3 rd September 2008 1. This is an appeal pursuant to CPR Rule 47.20 from a decision of Costs Officer Martin in relation to a detailed assessment which took place

More information

BRIEFING NIL BY MOUTH? EXCLUDING ORAL VARIATION OF CONTRACTS MAY 2018

BRIEFING NIL BY MOUTH? EXCLUDING ORAL VARIATION OF CONTRACTS MAY 2018 BRIEFING NIL BY MOUTH? EXCLUDING ORAL VARIATION OF CONTRACTS MAY 2018 THE UK SUPREME COURT HAS OVERTURNED THE DECISION OF THE COURT OF APPEAL, AND DETERMINED THAT NO ORAL MODIFICATION CLAUSES ARE EFFECTIVE

More information

Decision of the Single Judge. of the Players Status Committee

Decision of the Single Judge. of the Players Status Committee Decision of the Single Judge of the Players Status Committee passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 28 August 2013, by Geoff Thompson (England) Single Judge of the Players Status Committee, on the claim presented

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN BRIAN MOORE. And PUBLIC SERVICES CREDIT UNION CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN BRIAN MOORE. And PUBLIC SERVICES CREDIT UNION CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CV 2010-03257 BETWEEN BRIAN MOORE Claimant And PUBLIC SERVICES CREDIT UNION CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED Defendant Before the Honourable

More information

Ahmad Al-Naimi (t/a Buildmaster Construction Services) v. Islamic Press Agency Inc [2000] APP.L.R. 01/28

Ahmad Al-Naimi (t/a Buildmaster Construction Services) v. Islamic Press Agency Inc [2000] APP.L.R. 01/28 CA on Appeal from High Court of Justice TCC (HHJ Bowsher QC) before Waller LJ; Chadwick LJ. 28 th January 2000. JUDGMENT : Lord Justice Waller: 1. This is an appeal from the decision of His Honour Judge

More information

Before: THE SENIOR PRESIDENT OF TRIBUNALS LORD JUSTICE UNDERHILL Between:

Before: THE SENIOR PRESIDENT OF TRIBUNALS LORD JUSTICE UNDERHILL Between: Neutral Citation Number: [2017] EWCA Civ 16 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM The Divisional Court Sales LJ, Whipple J and Garnham J CB/3/37-38 Before: Case No: C1/2017/3068 Royal

More information

Before: HIS HONOUR JUDGE PELLING QC SITTING AS A JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT Between:

Before: HIS HONOUR JUDGE PELLING QC SITTING AS A JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT Between: Neutral Citation Number: [2017] EWHC 2146 (Ch) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CHANCERY DIVISION MANCHESTER DISTRICT REGISTRY Case No: C31MA092 Civil Justice Centre 1 Bridge street West Manchester M60 9DJ

More information

Before: LORD JUSTICE SULLIVAN LORD JUSTICE TOMLINSON and LORD JUSTICE LEWISON Between:

Before: LORD JUSTICE SULLIVAN LORD JUSTICE TOMLINSON and LORD JUSTICE LEWISON Between: Neutral Citation Number: [2014] EWCA Civ 1386 Case No: C1/2014/2773, 2756 and 2874 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEENS BENCH DIVISION PLANNING COURT

More information

Commercial Briefing. Consideration, Anti- Oral Variation Clauses and Collateral Unilateral Contracts. Andrew Bowen QC (Scotland) FCIARB

Commercial Briefing. Consideration, Anti- Oral Variation Clauses and Collateral Unilateral Contracts. Andrew Bowen QC (Scotland) FCIARB Spring 2018 Number 5 Commercial Briefing Andrew Bowen QC (Scotland) FCIARB Consideration, Anti- Oral Variation Clauses and Collateral Unilateral Contracts MWB Business Exchange Centres Ltd v Rock Advertising

More information

Enforcement of U.S. Court Judgments and Arbitral Awards in England

Enforcement of U.S. Court Judgments and Arbitral Awards in England Commercial Litigation and International Arbitration Client Service Group From Bryan Cave, London September 2011 Enforcement of U.S. Court Judgments and Arbitral Awards in England 1) U.S. (and Foreign)

More information

B e f o r e: LORD JUSTICE LEWISON LORD JUSTICE FLOYD

B e f o r e: LORD JUSTICE LEWISON LORD JUSTICE FLOYD A2/2014/1626 Neutral Citation Number: [2015] EWCA Civ 984 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE MANCHESTER DISTRICT REGISTRY QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION (HIS HONOUR JUDGE ARMITAGE QC) Royal

More information

Before : - and

Before : - and Neutral Citation Number: [2015] EWCA Civ 402 Case No: B2/2014/2010 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT CHELMSFORD His Honour Judge Moloney Q.C. Claim No. 3JD05152

More information

Chicken or Egg: Applying the Age- Old Question to Class Waivers in Employee Arbitration Agreements

Chicken or Egg: Applying the Age- Old Question to Class Waivers in Employee Arbitration Agreements Chicken or Egg: Applying the Age- Old Question to Class Waivers in Employee Arbitration Agreements By Bonnie Burke, Lawrence & Bundy LLC and Christina Tellado, Reed Smith LLP Companies with employees across

More information

Before: MRS JUSTICE O'FARRELL DBE Between:

Before: MRS JUSTICE O'FARRELL DBE Between: Neutral Citation Number: [2017] EWHC 2395 (TCC) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION TECHNOLOGY AND CONSTRUCTION COURT Case No: HT-2017-000173 Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A

More information

Africa and Arbitration: Predicting the future through historical lenses. Enforcement of awards: challenges and practical considerations

Africa and Arbitration: Predicting the future through historical lenses. Enforcement of awards: challenges and practical considerations Africa and Arbitration: Predicting the future through historical lenses Enforcement of awards: challenges and practical considerations 11 September 2014 1. Introduction The past 10 years have seen a significant

More information

Arbitration CAS 2010/A/2234 Basquet Menorca SAD v. Vladimer Boisa, award of 18 January 2011

Arbitration CAS 2010/A/2234 Basquet Menorca SAD v. Vladimer Boisa, award of 18 January 2011 Tribunal Arbitral du Sport Court of Arbitration for Sport Arbitration award of 18 January 2011 Panel: Mr Romano Subiotto QC (United Kingdom), President; Mr José Juan Pintó (Spain); Judge Vesna Bergant

More information

EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE COURT OF APPEAL WESTBURG ANSTALT. and PROFITSTAR ANSTALT. Before: The Hon. Dame Janice M.

EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE COURT OF APPEAL WESTBURG ANSTALT. and PROFITSTAR ANSTALT. Before: The Hon. Dame Janice M. TERRITORY OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS BVIHCMAP2013/0020 BETWEEN: EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE COURT OF APPEAL WESTBURG ANSTALT and PROFITSTAR ANSTALT Before: The Hon. Dame Janice M. Pereira, DBE The

More information

JUDGMENT. BPE Solicitors and another (Respondents) v Gabriel (Appellant)

JUDGMENT. BPE Solicitors and another (Respondents) v Gabriel (Appellant) Trinity Term [2015] UKSC 39 On appeal from: [2013] EWCA Civ 1513 JUDGMENT BPE Solicitors and another (Respondents) v Gabriel (Appellant) before Lord Mance Lord Sumption Lord Carnwath Lord Toulson Lord

More information

Before : THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE BEATSON Between :

Before : THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE BEATSON Between : Neutral Citation Number: [2011] EWHC 2452 (Comm) Case No: CLAIM NO. 2011 FOLIO 900 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION COMMERCIAL COURT Before : THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE BEATSON - - -

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE RHEANN CHUNG DEXTER ST LOUIS AND TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO TABLE TENNIS ASSOCIATION

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE RHEANN CHUNG DEXTER ST LOUIS AND TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO TABLE TENNIS ASSOCIATION THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No CV 2017-04608 BETWEEN RHEANN CHUNG DEXTER ST LOUIS Claimants AND TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO TABLE TENNIS ASSOCIATION Defendant Before

More information

Before: THE MASTER OF THE ROLLS LORD JUSTICE ELIAS and LORD JUSTICE BEATSON Between:

Before: THE MASTER OF THE ROLLS LORD JUSTICE ELIAS and LORD JUSTICE BEATSON Between: Neutral Citation Number: [2016] EWCA Civ 1290 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN S BENCH DIVISION COMMERCIAL COURT MR JUSTICE TEARE [2015] EWHC 1994

More information

Before : LADY JUSTICE ARDEN and LORD JUSTICE BRIGGS Between : - and -

Before : LADY JUSTICE ARDEN and LORD JUSTICE BRIGGS Between : - and - Neutral Citation Number: [2016] EWCA Civ 1034 Case No: B5/2016/0387 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM Civil and Family Justice Centre His Honour Judge N Bidder QC 3CF00338 Royal Courts

More information

Number: 1124/1/1/09 IN THE COMPETITION APPEAL TRIBUNAL. Victoria House Bloomsbury Place London WC1A 2EB. 3 November 2011

Number: 1124/1/1/09 IN THE COMPETITION APPEAL TRIBUNAL. Victoria House Bloomsbury Place London WC1A 2EB. 3 November 2011 43B 44BCase 45B 46B 47B 53B 52B 51B 48B 42BNeutral citation [2011] CAT 37 IN THE COMPETITION APPEAL TRIBUNAL Victoria House Bloomsbury Place London WC1A 2EB Number: 1124/1/1/09 3 November 2011 49Before:

More information

Before : LORD JUSTICE LAWS LORD JUSTICE RICHARDS and LORD JUSTICE LAWRENCE COLLINS Between :

Before : LORD JUSTICE LAWS LORD JUSTICE RICHARDS and LORD JUSTICE LAWRENCE COLLINS Between : Neutral Citation Number: [2008] EWCA Civ 1283 Case No: B2/2008/0489 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM CENTRAL LONDON CIVIL JUSTICE CENTRE HIS HONOUR JUDGE

More information

REGULATIONS FOR FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION DISCIPLINARY ACTION

REGULATIONS FOR FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION DISCIPLINARY ACTION DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURES - REGULATIONS 2015-2016 319 REGULATIONS FOR FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION DISCIPLINARY ACTION 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 These Regulations set out the way in which proceedings under Rules E and

More information

CHAPTER 4 THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT. Arrangement of Sections.

CHAPTER 4 THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT. Arrangement of Sections. CHAPTER 4 THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT. Arrangement of Sections. Section 1. Application. 2. Interpretation. PART I PRELIMINARY. PART II ARBITRATION. 3. Form of arbitration agreement. 4. Waiver

More information

IN THE KWAZULU NATAL HIGH COURT, DURBAN

IN THE KWAZULU NATAL HIGH COURT, DURBAN IN THE KWAZULU NATAL HIGH COURT, DURBAN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA CASE NO. A71/2009 In the matter between: BROBULK LIMITED APPLICANT and GREGOS SHIPPING LIMITED M V GREGOS SEAROUTE MARITIME LIMITED FIRST

More information

IN THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN MAY JOSEPHINE HUMPHREY AND

IN THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN MAY JOSEPHINE HUMPHREY AND IN THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE COURT OF APPEAL Civil Appeal No. 198 of 2011 BETWEEN MAY JOSEPHINE HUMPHREY Appellant AND TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO NATIONAL PETROLEUM MARKETING COMPANY LIMITED

More information

Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC)

Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 25 October 2012, in the following composition: Geoff Thompson (England), Chairman David Mayebi (Cameroon), member Guillermo

More information

ROLE OF ARBITRAL TRIBUNALS IN COMBATTING ECONOMIC CRIME IN INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION PRESENTATION BY CRAIG ORR QC

ROLE OF ARBITRAL TRIBUNALS IN COMBATTING ECONOMIC CRIME IN INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION PRESENTATION BY CRAIG ORR QC ROLE OF ARBITRAL TRIBUNALS IN COMBATTING ECONOMIC CRIME IN INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION PRESENTATION BY CRAIG ORR QC 1. I N T R O D U C T I O N 1. This presentation addresses the following topic: The legal

More information

PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW : CONFLICT OF LAWS

PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW : CONFLICT OF LAWS Arbitration under the Arbitration Act 1996 Aim: To provide a clear outline of the principal issues relating to the legally binding resolution of conflict of laws disputes via arbitration under the Arbitration

More information

GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE BY-LAW TABLE OF CONTENTS

GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE BY-LAW TABLE OF CONTENTS GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE BY-LAW TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. STATUS 2 INTERPRETATION 2 PURPOSE 2 GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE 2 REPEAL OF THE FFA GRIEVANCE RESOLUTION REGULATIONS 3 CONSTITUENT EXCLUSION

More information

Colliers International Property Consultants v Colliers Jordan Lee Jafaar Sdn Bhd [2008] APP.L.R. 07/03

Colliers International Property Consultants v Colliers Jordan Lee Jafaar Sdn Bhd [2008] APP.L.R. 07/03 JUDGMENT : Mr Justice Beatson: Commercial Court. 3 rd July 2008. 1. This application arises out of a dispute between members of the Colliers international property consulting group and the defendant, Colliers

More information

Avoiding jurisdictional disasters: How will the updated EU Jurisdiction Rules impact your dispute resolution strategy?

Avoiding jurisdictional disasters: How will the updated EU Jurisdiction Rules impact your dispute resolution strategy? Dispute resolution October 2015 Update Avoiding jurisdictional disasters: How will the updated EU Jurisdiction Rules impact your dispute resolution strategy? The UK continues to retain its position as

More information

B e f o r e: LORD JUSTICE FLOYD EUROPEAN HERITAGE LIMITED

B e f o r e: LORD JUSTICE FLOYD EUROPEAN HERITAGE LIMITED Neutral Citation Number: [2014] EWCA Civ 238 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION B2/2012/0611 Royal Courts of Justice Strand,London WC2A

More information

Anti-Suit Injunctions Overview

Anti-Suit Injunctions Overview Anti-Suit Injunctions Overview ICC Lex Mercatoria Minsk, 28 November 2014 Maria Gritsenko Roadmap Anti-suit injunctions By the courts example of England Legal Basis and Test Intra-EU Position West Tankers

More information

Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber

Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 21 November 2006, in the following composition: Slim Aloulou (Tunisia), Chairman Paulo Amoretty Souza (Brazil), member Ivan

More information

TENNIS AUSTRALIA DISCIPLINARY POLICY

TENNIS AUSTRALIA DISCIPLINARY POLICY TENNIS AUSTRALIA DISCIPLINARY POLICY Contents... 1 1. Application and Administration... 3 2. Categories of Offences... 4 3. Minor offences... 6 4. Serious offences... 7 5. Appeals procedures... 11 Notice

More information

Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber

Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 30 July 2014, in the following composition: Thomas Grimm (Switzerland), Deputy Chairman Johan van Gaalen (South Africa), member

More information

"Conflict of laws: Does the UK Court have jurisdiction to rule on infringement and/or validity of a US Patent? Why are we getting involved?

Conflict of laws: Does the UK Court have jurisdiction to rule on infringement and/or validity of a US Patent? Why are we getting involved? "Conflict of laws: Does the UK Court have jurisdiction to rule on infringement and/or validity of a US Patent? Why are we getting involved?" In Lucas Film v Ainsworth [2011] UKSC 39 the UK Supreme Court

More information

Before : MR JUSTICE LEWIS Between :

Before : MR JUSTICE LEWIS Between : Neutral Citation Number: [2014] EWHC 4222 (Admin) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION ADMINISTRATIVE COURT Case No: CO/8318/2013 Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL Before

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE UPPER TRIBUNAL (IMMIGRATION AND ASYLUM CHAMBER) McCloskey J and UT Judge Lindsley.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE UPPER TRIBUNAL (IMMIGRATION AND ASYLUM CHAMBER) McCloskey J and UT Judge Lindsley. Neutral Citation Number: [2018] EWCA Civ 5 C2/2015/3947 & C2/2015/3948 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE UPPER TRIBUNAL (IMMIGRATION AND ASYLUM CHAMBER) McCloskey J and UT Judge

More information