OMV Petrom SA v Glencore International AG [2014] EWHC 242 (Comm) (07 February 2014)

OMV Petrom SA v Glencore International AG [2014] EWHC 242 (Comm) (07 February 2014)

It is not an abuse of process for Glencore to defend itself in these proceedings by raising issues previously determined in arbitration, as Petrom has not satisfied the exacting test for abuse of process. The overlap of issues, the passage of time, and the death of a witness do not outweigh the unfairness to Glencore of preventing it from defending itself against serious allegations of fraud. The application was also made late, and Petrom's approach to the findings of the prior arbitration lacks mutuality.

Citation
[2014] EWHC 242 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: OMV Petrom SA; Defendant: Glencore International AG
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 February 2014
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Proceedings / Interlocutory Application Prior to Trial
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Res Judicata, Confidentiality in Arbitration, Fraud, Conspiracy, Limitation of Actions
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Arbitration Abuse of Process Res Judicata Confidentiality in Arbitration Fraud Conspiracy +1 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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

OMV Petrom SA

Claimant

Glencore International AG

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Proceedings / Interlocutory Application Prior to Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether it is an abuse of process for Glencore to relitigate issues determined in a prior arbitration
  2. 2 Whether findings in a prior arbitration are binding or preclusive in subsequent court proceedings involving a non-party to the arbitration
  3. 3 Whether the confidentiality of arbitration precludes reliance on its findings in court proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

It is not an abuse of process for Glencore to defend itself in these proceedings by raising issues previously determined in arbitration, as Petrom has not satisfied the exacting test for abuse of process. The overlap of issues, the passage of time, and the death of a witness do not outweigh the unfairness to Glencore of preventing it from defending itself against serious allegations of fraud. The application was also made late, and Petrom's approach to the findings of the prior arbitration lacks mutuality.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Petrom's application of 11 December 2013 based on abuse of process is refused.
  • Glencore's application to enforce confidentiality of the award is not pursued and is left for the trial judge.