A v B

A v B

The tribunal did not commit serious irregularity; it correctly applied the compensatory principle, properly disregarded pool accounting at this stage, and was entitled to find that the charterers would probably have performed the Shell and Valero fixtures without discount for loss of chance. Any errors or delays did not cause substantial injustice.

Parties
Claimant: A; Defendant: B
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 September 2018
Procedural Posture
Arbitration Claim / Judgment on Applications to Set Aside/appeal Arbitral Award
Outcome
applications dismissed
Legal Topics
Serious Irregularity, Compensatory Principle, Loss of Profits, Wasted Expenditure, Loss of Chance, Pool Agreements, Damages Assessment
Arbitration Commercial Law Contract Law Serious Irregularity Compensatory Principle Loss of Profits Wasted Expenditure Loss of Chance +2 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 4 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A

Claimant

B

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Arbitration Claim / Judgment on Applications to Set Aside/appeal Arbitral Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitral tribunal committed serious irregularity under section 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996
  2. 2 Whether the tribunal erred in awarding both loss of profits and wasted expenditure contrary to the compensatory principle
  3. 3 Whether the accounting position under the pool agreement should have been considered in damages assessment

Ratio Decidendi

The tribunal did not commit serious irregularity; it correctly applied the compensatory principle, properly disregarded pool accounting at this stage, and was entitled to find that the charterers would probably have performed the Shell and Valero fixtures without discount for loss of chance. Any errors or delays did not cause substantial injustice.

Court Disposition

applications dismissed

Orders

  • Applications under sections 68 and 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996 dismissed
  • No intervention or setting aside of the arbitral award