A v B

A v B

The bills of lading clearly incorporated a London arbitration clause, the defendant as lawful holder was bound by it, and by commencing proceedings in China the defendant breached the arbitration agreement. The claimant applied for relief promptly before the Chinese proceedings advanced on the merits. There was no strong reason to refuse relief. A final anti-suit injunction was appropriate to enforce the parties’ contractual rights and prevent wasteful parallel proceedings.

Parties
Claimant: Claimant (Head Owner of NV STAR MOIRA); Defendant: B (Chinese company)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 December 2020
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application (anti Suit Injunction) / Final Judgment on Application for Anti Suit Injunction
Outcome
Final anti-suit injunction granted in favour of the claimant.
Legal Topics
Anti Suit Injunctions, Arbitration Agreements, Jurisdictional Disputes, Incorporation of Charterparty Terms, Delay in Seeking Relief
Arbitration Shipping and Maritime Law Conflict of Laws Anti Suit Injunctions Arbitration Agreements Jurisdictional Disputes Incorporation of Charterparty Terms Delay in Seeking Relief

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 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Claimant (Head Owner of NV STAR MOIRA)

Claimant

B (Chinese company)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Application (anti Suit Injunction) / Final Judgment on Application for Anti Suit Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a London arbitration clause is incorporated into the bills of lading
  2. 2 Whether the defendant is bound by the arbitration clause as holder of the bills of lading
  3. 3 Whether the defendant is in breach of the arbitration clause by commencing proceedings in China

Ratio Decidendi

The bills of lading clearly incorporated a London arbitration clause, the defendant as lawful holder was bound by it, and by commencing proceedings in China the defendant breached the arbitration agreement. The claimant applied for relief promptly before the Chinese proceedings advanced on the merits. There was no strong reason to refuse relief. A final anti-suit injunction was appropriate to enforce the parties’ contractual rights and prevent wasteful parallel proceedings.

Court Disposition

Final anti-suit injunction granted in favour of the claimant.

Orders

  • The defendant is restrained from continuing or further pursuing the claim in the Qingdao Maritime Court, China, or any other claim in relation to disputes under or in respect of the two bills of lading dated 13 June 2019, in breach of the London arbitration clause.
  • Liberty to apply.