Enka Insaat Ve Sanayi AS v OOO Insurance Company Chubb & Ors (Rev 1) [2020] EWCA Civ 574 (29 April 2020)

Enka Insaat Ve Sanayi AS v OOO Insurance Company Chubb & Ors (Rev 1) [2020] EWCA Civ 574 (29 April 2020)

The English court, as the court of the seat, is the appropriate forum to determine and grant anti-suit injunctions in support of a London-seated arbitration agreement. Forum non conveniens does not apply to such claims. The judge below erred in declining jurisdiction on forum non conveniens grounds. The proper law of the arbitration agreement is English law, and the Moscow Claim falls within its scope. There is no strong reason to refuse anti-suit relief based on Enka's conduct or delay.

Citation
[2020] EWCA Civ 574
Parties
Claimant/appellant: ENKA INSAAT VE SANAYI A. S.; First Defendant/respondent: OOO 'INSURANCE COMPANY CHUBB'; Second Defendant/respondent: CHUBB RUSSIA INVESTMENTS LIMITED; Third Defendant/respondent: CHUBB EUROPEAN GROUP SE; Fourth Defendant/respondent: CHUBB LIMITED
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 April 2020
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court (commercial Court)
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Anti Suit Injunctions, Proper Law of Arbitration Agreement, Forum Non Conveniens, Supervisory Jurisdiction of Seat Court, Comity, Scope of Arbitration Clause
Arbitration Conflict of Laws Civil Procedure Anti Suit Injunctions Proper Law of Arbitration Agreement Forum Non Conveniens Supervisory Jurisdiction of Seat Court Comity +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ENKA INSAAT VE SANAYI A. S.

Claimant/appellant

OOO 'INSURANCE COMPANY CHUBB'

First Defendant/respondent

CHUBB RUSSIA INVESTMENTS LIMITED

Second Defendant/respondent

CHUBB EUROPEAN GROUP SE

Third Defendant/respondent

CHUBB LIMITED

Fourth Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court (commercial Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the English court as the court of the seat is the appropriate forum to grant anti-suit injunctions in support of a London-seated arbitration
  2. 2 Whether forum non conveniens applies to anti-suit injunction claims in support of arbitration agreements
  3. 3 What is the proper law of the arbitration agreement in the contract between Enka and Unipro/Chubb Russia

Ratio Decidendi

The English court, as the court of the seat, is the appropriate forum to determine and grant anti-suit injunctions in support of a London-seated arbitration agreement. Forum non conveniens does not apply to such claims. The judge below erred in declining jurisdiction on forum non conveniens grounds. The proper law of the arbitration agreement is English law, and the Moscow Claim falls within its scope. There is no strong reason to refuse anti-suit relief based on Enka's conduct or delay.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Declaration that Chubb Russia is bound by the arbitration agreement and that it applies to the Moscow Claim
  • Injunction restraining Chubb Russia from continuing the Russian proceedings in breach of the arbitration agreement