National Iranian Oil Company v Crescent Petroleum Company International Ltd & Anor [2016] EWHC 510 (Comm) (04 March 2016)

National Iranian Oil Company v Crescent Petroleum Company International Ltd & Anor [2016] EWHC 510 (Comm) (04 March 2016)

English law governs the separability of the arbitration clause due to the seat of arbitration being London; the arbitration agreement is separable and unaffected by the alleged corruption, as no targeted agreement to disapply s.7 was made. Consent to assignment was validly obtained by the claimant's board resolution and/or the countersigned guarantee contract. The public policy challenge under s.68(2)(g) fails as the arbitrators found no procurement by corruption, there is no fresh evidence, and English public policy does not render the contract unenforceable in these circumstances.

Citation
[2016] EWHC 510 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: National Iranian Oil Company; First Defendant: Crescent Petroleum Company International Ltd; Second Defendant: Crescent Gas Corporation Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 March 2016
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application Under Arbitration Act 1996 (ss.67 and 68) / Judgment on Preliminary Issues
Outcome
Claimant's applications under s.67 and s.68 of the Arbitration Act 1996 dismissed; preliminary issues resolved in favour of the defendants.
Legal Topics
Separability of Arbitration Agreement, Assignment of Contract, Public Policy in Arbitration, Corruption and Bribery in Contracts
Arbitration Commercial Law Separability of Arbitration Agreement Assignment of Contract Public Policy in Arbitration Corruption and Bribery in Contracts

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

National Iranian Oil Company

Claimant

Crescent Petroleum Company International Ltd

First Defendant

Crescent Gas Corporation Ltd

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Application Under Arbitration Act 1996 (ss.67 and 68) / Judgment on Preliminary Issues

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the issue of separability of the arbitration clause is governed by English law
  2. 2 Whether the arbitration clause is separable and unaffected by alleged corruption
  3. 3 Whether consent to assignment was obtained within the meaning of Article 16.1 of the GSPC

Ratio Decidendi

English law governs the separability of the arbitration clause due to the seat of arbitration being London; the arbitration agreement is separable and unaffected by the alleged corruption, as no targeted agreement to disapply s.7 was made. Consent to assignment was validly obtained by the claimant's board resolution and/or the countersigned guarantee contract. The public policy challenge under s.68(2)(g) fails as the arbitrators found no procurement by corruption, there is no fresh evidence, and English public policy does not render the contract unenforceable in these circumstances.

Court Disposition

Claimant's applications under s.67 and s.68 of the Arbitration Act 1996 dismissed; preliminary issues resolved in favour of the defendants.

Orders

  • Claimant's challenge to the arbitral award under s.67 dismissed.
  • Claimant's challenge to the arbitral award under s.68(2)(g) struck out as unarguable.