Arbitration Law Monthly

In MSC Mediterranean Shipping Co SA v Stolt Tank Containers BV and Others (The MSC Flaminia) [2022] EWHC 835 (Admlty), Andrew Baker J was required to review an arbitration award to determine whether the declarations made by the tribunal were of a nature to give rise to an issue estoppel in subsequent judicial proceedings. There was also an issue in relation to the grant of anti-suit relief.

A party to an arbitration clause commences legal proceedings in breach of the clause. The other party defends the proceedings. Can it be said that there has been an agreement to abandon the arbitration clause in the form of an accepted repudiation? The matter was again considered, by the Singapore High Court, in CLQ v CLR [2021] SGHC(I) 15.

A party to an arbitration clause commences legal proceedings in breach of the clause. The other party defends the proceedings. Can it be said that there has been an agreement to abandon the arbitration clause in the form of an accepted repudiation? The matter was again considered, by the Singapore High Court, in CLQ v CLR [2021] SGHC(I) 15.

The Hong Kong Court of Appeal in C v D [2022] HKCA 729 has confirmed the correctness of first instance decisions applying the distinction now recognised in England and Singapore between jurisdiction and admissibility. The position in Hong Kong is now that the question whether the preconditions to arbitration in a tiered dispute resolution clause have been satisfied is a matter for the tribunal and not the court, so that a ruling by the tribunal that the terms have been satisfied is not appealable.

In Kei v Hua She Asset Management (Shanghai) Co Ltd [2022] EWHC 662 (Comm) Julia Dias QC, sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge, considered and rejected an application to set aside an order enforcing a Shanghai arbitration award. The ground for the application was section 103(2)(c) of the Arbitration Act 1996, namely that the applicant had not been given notice of the arbitration proceedings or had otherwise been unable to present his case.

The issue in DHL Project & Chartering Ltd v Gemini Ocean Shipping Co Ltd [2022] EWHC 181 (Comm) was whether a finding by an arbitrator that there was a binding charterparty containing an arbitration clause was capable of challenge on jurisdictional grounds. Jacobs J held that the charterparty and the arbitration clause were inseparable and that a jurisdictional challenge under section 67 of the Arbitration Act 1996 was available.