Kallang Shipping SA v Axa Assurances Senegal & Ors

Kallang Shipping SA v Axa Assurances Senegal & Ors

The Defendants’ conduct in refusing reasonable Club security and insisting on Senegalese jurisdiction amounted to a good arguable case of breach of implied terms of the arbitration clause and oppressive conduct, justifying the original anti-suit injunction. However, with the Second Defendant’s undertaking to pursue the claim only in London arbitration and the release of the vessel, there is no need to continue or impose new injunctions. The Third Defendant, Axa France, is not sufficiently implicated and is removed from the proceedings.

Parties
Claimant: Kallang Shipping S.A.; Defendant: Axa Assurances Senegal; Defendant: Comptoir Commercial Mandiaye Ndiaye; Defendant: Axa France Assurance S.A.
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 November 2006
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application / Interlocutory Judgment on Application to Set Aside Anti Suit Injunction and Service Out of Jurisdiction
Outcome
Application to discharge anti-suit injunction refused; application to set aside service against Third Defendant (Axa France) allowed.
Legal Topics
Anti Suit Injunctions, Arbitration Clauses, Jurisdiction, Implied Contractual Terms, Vexatious and Oppressive Conduct
Commercial Law Arbitration Shipping Law Anti Suit Injunctions Arbitration Clauses Jurisdiction Implied Contractual Terms Vexatious and Oppressive Conduct

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

Parties

Kallang Shipping S.A.

Claimant

Axa Assurances Senegal

Defendant

Comptoir Commercial Mandiaye Ndiaye

Defendant

Axa France Assurance S.A.

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Application / Interlocutory Judgment on Application to Set Aside Anti Suit Injunction and Service Out of Jurisdiction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Defendants breached the London arbitration clause by invoking Senegalese proceedings
  2. 2 Whether the conduct of the Defendants was vexatious or oppressive
  3. 3 Whether implied terms should be read into the contract to prevent frustration of the arbitration clause

Ratio Decidendi

The Defendants’ conduct in refusing reasonable Club security and insisting on Senegalese jurisdiction amounted to a good arguable case of breach of implied terms of the arbitration clause and oppressive conduct, justifying the original anti-suit injunction. However, with the Second Defendant’s undertaking to pursue the claim only in London arbitration and the release of the vessel, there is no need to continue or impose new injunctions. The Third Defendant, Axa France, is not sufficiently implicated and is removed from the proceedings.

Court Disposition

Application to discharge anti-suit injunction refused; application to set aside service against Third Defendant (Axa France) allowed.

Orders

  • Anti-suit injunction not discharged; no new injunctions imposed.
  • Third Defendant (Axa France) removed from proceedings; service set aside.