Gold Coast Ltd. v Naval Gijon SA

Gold Coast Ltd. v Naval Gijon SA

Substantial injustice would be caused to the Buyer if extension of time were not granted, as the Tribunal acknowledged an error in quantifying financing charges and the Buyer has a substantial prospect of success in its application for correction. The delay was reasonable and explicable, and no significant prejudice would be caused to the Yard by granting the extension.

Parties
Applicant/buyer/respondent: Gold Coast Limited; Respondent/yard/claimant: Naval Gijon SA
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 May 2006
Procedural Posture
Arbitration Related Application / Ruling on Application for Retrospective Extension of Time Under Section 79 Arbitration Act 1996
Outcome
Application for retrospective extension of time granted.
Legal Topics
Extension of Time Limits, Correction of Arbitral Awards, Substantial Injustice, Shipbuilding Contract, Interest on Sums Due
Arbitration Commercial Law Extension of Time Limits Correction of Arbitral Awards Substantial Injustice Shipbuilding Contract Interest on Sums Due

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gold Coast Limited

Applicant/buyer/respondent

Naval Gijon SA

Respondent/yard/claimant

Procedural Posture

Arbitration Related Application / Ruling on Application for Retrospective Extension of Time Under Section 79 Arbitration Act 1996

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether substantial injustice would be caused to the Buyer if extension of time for section 57 application is refused
  2. 2 Whether the Buyer acted reasonably in the delay
  3. 3 Whether the Tribunal made an error in quantifying financing charges

Ratio Decidendi

Substantial injustice would be caused to the Buyer if extension of time were not granted, as the Tribunal acknowledged an error in quantifying financing charges and the Buyer has a substantial prospect of success in its application for correction. The delay was reasonable and explicable, and no significant prejudice would be caused to the Yard by granting the extension.

Court Disposition

Application for retrospective extension of time granted.

Orders

  • Time for Buyer to make section 57 application to Tribunal extended until 31 March 2006.
  • Liberty to apply granted if further extension for Tribunal response is required.