Failure to deal with all issues

Gavin Kealey QC, sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge, has, in Buyuk Camlica Shipping Trading & Industry Co Inc v Progress Bulk Carriers Ltd [2010] EWHC 442 (Comm) laid down a series of important principles in respect of appeals to the court under s68 of the Arbitration Act for alleged serious irregularity. The decision analyses the scope of s68(2)(d) (failure by arbitrators to deal all of the issues put to them), and then discusses the procedural formalities for an appeal, including the need to exhaust other remedies and the extension of time where a tactical decision has been made not to pay for and collect the award.

Buyuk: the facts

The claimant, Buyuk Camlica Shipping Trading & Industry Co Inc (‘Buyuk’) chartered the bulk carrier Hilal I to Progress Bulk Carriers Ltd (‘Progress’) under two separate time charters, from 1 October 2004 until 30 March 2005 and then from 30 March 2005 until 24 August 2005. The charterparties were on the same terms (other than in respect of the rate of hire) and contained LMAA arbitration clauses. Disputes arose under each of the charterparties. As regards 2004 charterparty, Buyuk refused to carry a cargo of hot moulded briquettes of direct reduced iron from Libya. As regards the second charterparty, Buyuk refused to carry a cargo of direct reduced iron from Trinidad to New Orleans. Clause 38 of each agreement specifically excluded the carriage of direct reduced iron in any form, but Progress asserted that there had been oral variations under which such carriage was permitted.