The London Steam-Ship Owners' Mutual Insurance Association Ltd v Spain (M/T "PRESTIGE")
Spain is not immune from the Club's application to appoint an arbitrator under section 18 of the Arbitration Act 1996 because, by pursuing claims under the insurance contract, Spain is bound by the arbitration clause under the conditional benefit principle and has agreed in writing to arbitrate such disputes within the meaning of SIA section 9; alternatively, Spain's pursuit of the claims is a commercial activity under SIA section 3(1)(a), and the court should appoint an arbitrator for all claims except the Club's contractual claim arising from Spain's participation in the section 66 proceedings, for which no agreement to arbitrate was established.
- Parties
- Claimant/respondent: The London Steam-Ship Owners’ Mutual Insurance Association Limited; Defendant/applicant: The Kingdom of Spain
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 18 June 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Arbitration Claim (application to Appoint Arbitrator) / Ruling on CPR Part 11 Application to Set Aside Service and Challenge Jurisdiction
- Outcome
- Spain's application to set aside service and challenge jurisdiction is dismissed; the court will appoint an arbitrator under section 18 of the Arbitration Act 1996 except for the Club's contractual claim arising from the section 66 proceedings.
- Legal Topics
- State Immunity Act 1978, Arbitration Act 1996 Section 18, Conditional Benefit Principle, Anti Suit Injunctions, Equitable Compensation, Merger of Causes of Action, Damages in Lieu of Injunction, Jurisdictional Challenges, Enforcement of Arbitration Awards
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
The London Steam-Ship Owners’ Mutual Insurance Association Limited
Claimant/respondent
The Kingdom of Spain
Defendant/applicant
Procedural Posture
Arbitration Claim (application to Appoint Arbitrator) / Ruling on CPR Part 11 Application to Set Aside Service and Challenge Jurisdiction
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether Spain is immune from jurisdiction under the State Immunity Act 1978 in respect of the Club's application to appoint an arbitrator under section 18 of the Arbitration Act 1996
- 2 Whether Spain has agreed in writing to submit the relevant disputes to arbitration within the meaning of SIA section 9
- 3 Whether the Club's claims are arbitrable or merged into previous awards/judgments
Ratio Decidendi
Spain is not immune from the Club's application to appoint an arbitrator under section 18 of the Arbitration Act 1996 because, by pursuing claims under the insurance contract, Spain is bound by the arbitration clause under the conditional benefit principle and has agreed in writing to arbitrate such disputes within the meaning of SIA section 9; alternatively, Spain's pursuit of the claims is a commercial activity under SIA section 3(1)(a), and the court should appoint an arbitrator for all claims except the Club's contractual claim arising from Spain's participation in the section 66 proceedings, for which no agreement to arbitrate was established.
Court Disposition
Spain's application to set aside service and challenge jurisdiction is dismissed; the court will appoint an arbitrator under section 18 of the Arbitration Act 1996 except for the Club's contractual claim arising from the section 66 proceedings.
Orders
- Permission granted to serve arbitration claim form out of jurisdiction stands.
- Court will appoint an arbitrator under section 18 of the Arbitration Act 1996 (except for the Club's contractual claim).
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment