China Export & Credit Insurance Corporation v Emerald Energy Resources Ltd [2018] EWHC 1503 (Comm) (22 June 2018)

China Export & Credit Insurance Corporation v Emerald Energy Resources Ltd [2018] EWHC 1503 (Comm) (22 June 2018)

The claim on the Promissory Note is governed by English law and subject to a non-exclusive English jurisdiction clause. The arbitration clause in the Farm-In Agreements does not extend to the claim on the Note, which is a separate contract. No binding compromise agreement was concluded. Emerald is contractually bound to submit to the jurisdiction of the English court and is not entitled to a stay under section 9 of the Arbitration Act 1996 or under the inherent jurisdiction of the Court.

Citation
[2018] EWHC 1503 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant/respondent: China Export & Credit Insurance Corporation; Defendant/applicant: Emerald Energy Resources Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 June 2018
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Claim (jurisdiction Challenge) / Application for Declaration of No Jurisdiction and Stay of Proceedings
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction, Arbitration Agreements, Stay of Proceedings, Promissory Notes, Assignment of Debt
Commercial Law Arbitration Conflict of Laws Jurisdiction Arbitration Agreements Stay of Proceedings Promissory Notes Assignment of Debt

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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

China Export & Credit Insurance Corporation

Claimant/respondent

Emerald Energy Resources Limited

Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Claim (jurisdiction Challenge) / Application for Declaration of No Jurisdiction and Stay of Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the English High Court has jurisdiction over the claim on the promissory note
  2. 2 Whether the claim is subject to an arbitration agreement and should be stayed under section 9 of the Arbitration Act 1996
  3. 3 Whether a binding compromise agreement was concluded extinguishing liability under the Note

Ratio Decidendi

The claim on the Promissory Note is governed by English law and subject to a non-exclusive English jurisdiction clause. The arbitration clause in the Farm-In Agreements does not extend to the claim on the Note, which is a separate contract. No binding compromise agreement was concluded. Emerald is contractually bound to submit to the jurisdiction of the English court and is not entitled to a stay under section 9 of the Arbitration Act 1996 or under the inherent jurisdiction of the Court.

Court Disposition

Application refused

Orders

  • Emerald's challenge to the jurisdiction of the Court and applications for a stay of the claim are refused.