Sino Dragon Trading Ltd v Noble Resources International Pte Ltd [2015] FCA 1028

Sino Dragon Trading Ltd v Noble Resources International Pte Ltd [2015] FCA 1028

The Federal Court lacks power to decide a challenge to the arbitrators under Article 13(3) of the Model Law where the agreed procedure (UNCITRAL Rules/appointing authority) has not yet been exhausted. No general residual common law power exists for court intervention in challenges to arbitrators, and no power exists under Model Law Articles 13, 14, 17J, or 27, or under relevant sections of the International Arbitration Act, to make the orders sought (removal for delay, subpoenas, or declarations of invalid appointment) in the circumstances. The process agreed by the parties and mandated by the Act must be followed.

Parties
Applicant: Sino Dragon Trading Ltd; First Respondent: Noble Resources International Pte Ltd; Second Respondent: Maxwell Thomas Bennett Bonnell; Third Respondent: Jonathan Kay Hoyle
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 September 2015
Procedural Posture
Arbitration Related (court Intervention) / Application to Court for Orders During Arbitral Proceedings
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Challenge to Arbitrators, Removal of Arbitrators, Arbitration Subpoenas, Jurisdiction of Arbitral Tribunal, Court Intervention in Arbitration
Arbitration International Commercial Law Challenge to Arbitrators Removal of Arbitrators Arbitration Subpoenas Jurisdiction of Arbitral Tribunal Court Intervention in Arbitration

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sino Dragon Trading Ltd

Applicant

Noble Resources International Pte Ltd

First Respondent

Maxwell Thomas Bennett Bonnell

Second Respondent

Jonathan Kay Hoyle

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Arbitration Related (court Intervention) / Application to Court for Orders During Arbitral Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court can decide a challenge to arbitrators under Article 13(3) of the Model Law before the challenge has been unsuccessful before the appointing authority
  2. 2 Whether the court has common law power to remove arbitrators
  3. 3 Whether there was undue delay by the tribunal justifying removal under Article 14 of the Model Law

Ratio Decidendi

The Federal Court lacks power to decide a challenge to the arbitrators under Article 13(3) of the Model Law where the agreed procedure (UNCITRAL Rules/appointing authority) has not yet been exhausted. No general residual common law power exists for court intervention in challenges to arbitrators, and no power exists under Model Law Articles 13, 14, 17J, or 27, or under relevant sections of the International Arbitration Act, to make the orders sought (removal for delay, subpoenas, or declarations of invalid appointment) in the circumstances. The process agreed by the parties and mandated by the Act must be followed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.