Key Facts
- •E-Star Shipping and Trading Company Ltd (E-Star) applied for an anti-suit injunction and relief under section 44 of the Arbitration Act 1996 against Delta Corp Shipping Ltd (Delta).
- •The dispute concerned a cargo of rice and a chain of charterparties.
- •Benin court proceedings resulted in an order for the sale of the cargo if shippers/receivers didn't pay Delta.
- •A settlement agreement existed between several parties, including E-Star and Delta, containing an arbitration clause, but its effectiveness was disputed due to lack of signatures from all parties.
- •E-Star was a defendant in the Benin proceedings but claims it wasn't served and didn't participate fully.
- •E-Star sought to reverse the Benin court's order and preserve potential sale proceeds.
Legal Principles
For an anti-suit injunction, there must be a high degree of probability of a binding arbitration clause governing the dispute.
QBE Europe SA/NV and another v Generali España de Seguros Y Reaseguros [2022] EWHC 2062 (Comm)
The court must consider whether an arbitration agreement exists and governs the dispute when granting anti-suit injunctions.
QBE Europe SA/NV and another v Generali España de Seguros Y Reaseguros [2022] EWHC 2062 (Comm)
Anti-suit injunctions are not typically granted when foreign proceedings have concluded.
Thomas Raphael QC, The Anti-Suit Injunction 2nd Edition, paragraphs 5.65 to 5.72
In anti-suit injunction applications, parties must act promptly and before foreign proceedings are too far advanced.
Section 44 of the Arbitration Act 1996 allows for the preservation of assets relevant to potential arbitration proceedings.
Arbitration Act 1996, Section 44
Comity considerations influence the court's decision in granting or refusing relief.
The doctrine of separability does not apply when a contract explicitly states that its effectiveness depends on the signatures of all parties.
Outcomes
Anti-suit/anti-enforcement injunction denied.
Lack of a high degree of probability of a binding arbitration agreement due to the unsigned settlement agreement; the application was essentially an anti-enforcement injunction, filed too late after the Benin court proceedings concluded; significant delay in applying for the injunction.
Section 44 relief denied.
Lack of a valid arbitration agreement; comity considerations, given the Benin court's ongoing involvement and orders related to the cargo.