Chantiers De L'atlantique SA v Gaztransport & Technigaz SAS [2011] EWHC 3383 (Comm) (20 December 2011)

Chantiers De L'atlantique SA v Gaztransport & Technigaz SAS [2011] EWHC 3383 (Comm) (20 December 2011)

The court held that CAT failed to establish, to the requisite standard, that the arbitration award was obtained by fraud. The evidence did not show deliberate and dishonest concealment of the B0 test results by GTT in the arbitration, nor that any such concealment caused substantial injustice or would probably have affected the outcome. The application for extension of time was granted, but the substantive application to set aside the award was dismissed.

Citation
[2011] EWHC 3383 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: CHANTIERS DE L'ATLANTIQUE S. A; Defendant: GAZTRANSPORT & TECHNIGAZ S. A. S
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 December 2011
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application to Set Aside Arbitration Award / Judgment on Application Under Section 68(2)(g) Arbitration Act 1996
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Setting Aside Arbitral Awards, Fraud in Arbitration, Serious Irregularity, Extension of Time, Disclosure Obligations
Arbitration Commercial Law Setting Aside Arbitral Awards Fraud in Arbitration Serious Irregularity Extension of Time Disclosure Obligations

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 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CHANTIERS DE L'ATLANTIQUE S. A

Claimant

GAZTRANSPORT & TECHNIGAZ S. A. S

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Application to Set Aside Arbitration Award / Judgment on Application Under Section 68(2)(g) Arbitration Act 1996

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitration award was obtained by fraud under section 68(2)(g) of the Arbitration Act 1996
  2. 2 Whether there was deliberate concealment of material test results by the defendant
  3. 3 Whether the alleged fraud caused substantial injustice to the claimant

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that CAT failed to establish, to the requisite standard, that the arbitration award was obtained by fraud. The evidence did not show deliberate and dishonest concealment of the B0 test results by GTT in the arbitration, nor that any such concealment caused substantial injustice or would probably have affected the outcome. The application for extension of time was granted, but the substantive application to set aside the award was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Extension of time to bring the application granted
  • Application to set aside the arbitration award dismissed