BTC Bulk Transport Corporation v Glencore International AG

BTC Bulk Transport Corporation v Glencore International AG

The tribunal breached s.33 of the Arbitration Act 1996 by failing to make clear to BTC that it was proceeding to a final determination of the counterclaim and by not giving BTC the opportunity to adduce further evidence or submissions as it had expressly reserved. This constituted a serious irregularity under s.68, causing substantial injustice by depriving BTC of the opportunity to fully defend the counterclaim and to seek permission to appeal. The matter must be remitted to the tribunal for reconsideration.

Parties
Claimant: BTC Bulk Transport Corporation; Defendant: Glencore International AG
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 June 2006
Procedural Posture
Arbitration Challenge (s.68 Arbitration Act 1996) / Judgment on Application to Set Aside/remit Arbitration Award
Outcome
Application allowed; arbitration award set aside/remitted; costs awarded to BTC (subject to deduction).
Legal Topics
Serious Irregularity, Substantial Injustice, Arbitration Procedure, Section 68 Arbitration Act 1996, Section 33 Arbitration Act 1996, Section 32(2) Sale of Goods Act 1979
Arbitration Commercial Law Serious Irregularity Substantial Injustice Arbitration Procedure Section 68 Arbitration Act 1996 Section 33 Arbitration Act 1996 Section 32(2) Sale of Goods Act 1979

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

BTC Bulk Transport Corporation

Claimant

Glencore International AG

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Arbitration Challenge (s.68 Arbitration Act 1996) / Judgment on Application to Set Aside/remit Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitrators committed a serious irregularity under s.68 Arbitration Act 1996 by breaching their duty under s.33 to act fairly and give each party a reasonable opportunity to present its case
  2. 2 Whether BTC suffered substantial injustice as a result of the tribunal's procedure

Ratio Decidendi

The tribunal breached s.33 of the Arbitration Act 1996 by failing to make clear to BTC that it was proceeding to a final determination of the counterclaim and by not giving BTC the opportunity to adduce further evidence or submissions as it had expressly reserved. This constituted a serious irregularity under s.68, causing substantial injustice by depriving BTC of the opportunity to fully defend the counterclaim and to seek permission to appeal. The matter must be remitted to the tribunal for reconsideration.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; arbitration award set aside/remitted; costs awarded to BTC (subject to deduction).

Orders

  • The matter is remitted to the tribunal for reconsideration.
  • BTC awarded costs of £13,000.