Bunge SA v Nibulon Trading BV

Bunge SA v Nibulon Trading BV

The tribunal exercised its discretion under rule 21(a) to admit the buyers’ claim, and the board of appeal erred in law by concluding otherwise. Such an exercise of discretion is not appealable, and the board had no jurisdiction to reverse it. The board’s interpretation of the tribunal’s award was incorrect, and the matter must be remitted for consideration of the merits.

Parties
Claimant (appellant): Bunge SA; Defendant (respondent): Nibulon Trading BV
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 December 2013
Procedural Posture
Commercial Arbitration Appeal / Appeal From GAFTA Board of Appeal to High Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Time Bar in Arbitration, Exercise of Discretion Under Arbitration Rules, Interpretation of Arbitration Rules, Waiver in Arbitration, Appeal Rights in Arbitration
Arbitration Commercial Law Time Bar in Arbitration Exercise of Discretion Under Arbitration Rules Interpretation of Arbitration Rules Waiver in Arbitration Appeal Rights in Arbitration

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bunge SA

Claimant (appellant)

Nibulon Trading BV

Defendant (respondent)

Procedural Posture

Commercial Arbitration Appeal / Appeal From GAFTA Board of Appeal to High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the first-tier tribunal exercised its discretion to admit the Buyer’s claim under rule 21(a) of GAFTA No. 125 Arbitration Rules
  2. 2 Whether the tribunal's discretion under rule 21(a) is limited only to circumstances outside the reasonable contemplation of the parties at the time of contract
  3. 3 Whether the board of appeal can overrule the tribunal’s admission of a claim under rule 21(a)

Ratio Decidendi

The tribunal exercised its discretion under rule 21(a) to admit the buyers’ claim, and the board of appeal erred in law by concluding otherwise. Such an exercise of discretion is not appealable, and the board had no jurisdiction to reverse it. The board’s interpretation of the tribunal’s award was incorrect, and the matter must be remitted for consideration of the merits.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • The matter is remitted to the GAFTA board of appeal to consider the merits of sellers’ appeal from the tribunal’s award.