HYUNDAI MERCHANT MARINE CO LTD V AMERICAS BULK TRANSPORT LTD (THE "PACIFIC CHAMP")

[2013] EWHC 470 (Comm), Queen's Bench Division, Commercial Court, Mr Justice Eder, 8 March 2013

Arbitration - Jurisdiction - Serious irregularity - Error of law - Allegation that no agreement entered into - Arbitration Act 1996, sections 67 to 69

HMM was the bareboat charterer of the vessel Pacific Champ. The trading limits in the charter excluded the Orinoco River. In February 2008 HMM entered into negotiations with ABT for a fixture. ABT wished to transport a cargo of hot moulded iron briquettes via the Orinoco. A first recap email was sent by ABT to HMM on 11 February, along with a proforma charterparty, but it was common ground that there was no contract at this stage, because the parties had not agreed on the place of redelivery. After further conversations, a second recap email was sent by ABT to HMM on 12 February, which was on its face complete. The second recap stated that it was subject to confirmation by ABT. Subsequently HMM sent ABT an email containing comments, and proposing amendments permitting the carriage of the cargo. The following day ABT confirmed that the vessel was "fully fixed". HMM refused to perform, and ABT obtained an arbitration award to the effect that there was a binding agreement. HMM appealed. Eder J held that the award should be set aside under section 67 of the Arbitration Act 1996: on the facts the parties had not reached consensus on whether the cargo could be carried, and so there was no agreement and thus no arbitration clause.