The French State v The London Steam-Ship Owners’ Mutual Insurance Association Limited
[2023] EWHC 2474 (Comm)
The French State v The London Steam-Ship Mutual Insurance Association Limited
19 December 2023
[2023] EWHC 3263 (Comm)
High Court
Two countries appealed court decisions. The judge allowed one appeal on a key point about fair compensation, but not others because they weren't important enough or likely to succeed. One country was allowed to appeal another decision but not skip straight to the highest court.
Key Facts
- •Appeals by the French State and the Kingdom of Spain against judgments of the Commercial Court
- •Appeals relate to arbitration awards and a Registration Order
- •Applications for leave to appeal under s. 69(8) Arbitration Act 1996 and permission to appeal/leapfrog certificate under s. 12 Administration of Justice Act 1969
- •Disputes involve equitable compensation and interpretation of CJEU judgment
- •Issues of general public importance and real prospect of success considered
Legal Principles
Leave to appeal under s. 69(8) Arbitration Act 1996 requires a point of general importance and a real prospect of success.
Arbitration Act 1996
Permission to appeal and leapfrog certificates under s. 12 Administration of Justice Act 1969 require points of law of general public importance.
Administration of Justice Act 1969
The fact that leave to appeal was given under s. 69(2)(b) AA 1996 on the basis of general public importance does not automatically mean leave should be granted under s. 69(8).
Kyla Shipping Co Ltd v Bunge SA [2013] EWCA Civ 734
Granting a leapfrog certificate involves merits-based and discretionary considerations; all issues should appropriately be determined together by the Court of Appeal.
Henderson v Dorset Healthcare University NHS Trust [2017] 1 WLR 2673
Outcomes
Leave to appeal granted to both States under s. 69(8) AA 1996 on the equitable compensation ground.
Point of general importance with a real prospect of success.
Leave to appeal refused to Spain on grounds (1) and (2).
Grounds lack general importance and real prospect of success; CJEU judgment not relevant; interests of justice favour finality.
Permission to appeal granted to Spain on the Registration Order.
Relatively low threshold met, despite doubts about prospect of success.
Leap frog certificate under s. 12 AJA refused.
Not all grounds are points of law of general public importance; issues better determined together by the Court of Appeal.
Similar Cases
The London Steam-Ship Owners’ Mutual Insurance Association Limited v The Kingdom of Spain (M/T ‘Prestige’)
[2023] EWHC 2473 (Comm)
Kevin Osler v Marlene Osler & Ors
[2024] EWCA Civ 516
Operafund Eco-Invest Sicav PLC & Anor v Kingdom of Spain
[2024] EWHC 82 (Comm)
Infrastructure Services Luxembourg S.À.R.L & Anor. v Kingdom of Spain
[2023] EWHC 1226 (Comm)