Kallang Shipping SA Panama v Axa Assurances Senegal & Anor

Kallang Shipping SA Panama v Axa Assurances Senegal & Anor

AXA Senegal, knowing of the London arbitration clause, used the arrest and demand for a Senegalese bank guarantee as a means to force the Owners to relinquish their right to arbitrate in London, thereby inducing CCMN to breach the arbitration agreement. This conduct went beyond merely seeking security and constituted a breach of contract for which AXA Senegal is liable in damages. The claim for conspiracy failed as there was no evidence of CCMN's participation beyond AXA Senegal's unilateral actions.

Parties
Claimant: Kallang Shipping S.A. Panama; Defendant: AXA Assurances Senegal; Defendant: Comptoir Commercial Mandiaye Ndiaye
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 November 2008
Procedural Posture
Commercial Claim (breach of Contract, Tortious Interference, Conspiracy) / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Judgment for the Claimant against AXA Senegal; claim for conspiracy dismissed; claim against CCMN limited to costs.
Legal Topics
Incorporation of Arbitration Clauses, Breach of Arbitration Agreement, Wrongful Arrest of Vessel, Inducement of Breach of Contract, Damages for Breach of Contract, Jurisdictional Disputes, Obtaining Security by Arrest, Tortious Interference, Conspiracy
Commercial Law Arbitration Maritime Law Conflict of Laws Incorporation of Arbitration Clauses Breach of Arbitration Agreement Wrongful Arrest of Vessel Inducement of Breach of Contract +5 more

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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kallang Shipping S.A. Panama

Claimant

AXA Assurances Senegal

Defendant

Comptoir Commercial Mandiaye Ndiaye

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Claim (breach of Contract, Tortious Interference, Conspiracy) / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an arbitration clause was incorporated into the bills of lading and its effect
  2. 2 Whether the defendants breached the express or implied terms of the arbitration clause by arresting the vessel and demanding security answerable to Senegalese jurisdiction
  3. 3 Whether AXA Senegal induced or procured CCMN to breach contract or interfered with business relations

Ratio Decidendi

AXA Senegal, knowing of the London arbitration clause, used the arrest and demand for a Senegalese bank guarantee as a means to force the Owners to relinquish their right to arbitrate in London, thereby inducing CCMN to breach the arbitration agreement. This conduct went beyond merely seeking security and constituted a breach of contract for which AXA Senegal is liable in damages. The claim for conspiracy failed as there was no evidence of CCMN's participation beyond AXA Senegal's unilateral actions.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the Claimant against AXA Senegal; claim for conspiracy dismissed; claim against CCMN limited to costs.

Orders

  • AXA Senegal to pay US$130,350 in damages to the Owners.
  • Costs as against CCMN only.