SEA2011 Inc v ICT Ltd

SEA2011 Inc v ICT Ltd

There was a clear mistake in the naming of ICT Ltd in the Sales Agency Agreement, which should be corrected to IN Ltd trading as ICT. The parties' conduct established an implied contract between SEA2011 Inc and ICT Ltd on the same terms as the Sales Agency Agreement, including the arbitration clause. The Arbitrator had jurisdiction as the implied contract argument fell within the scope of the Notice of Arbitration and/or was accepted by the parties during proceedings.

Parties
Claimant: SEA2011 Inc; Defendant: ICT Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 March 2018
Procedural Posture
Arbitration Challenge Under Section 67 Arbitration Act 1996 / Judgment on Jurisdictional Challenge
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Jurisdictional Challenge, Implied Contract, Misnomer in Contract, Arbitration Clause Incorporation
Arbitration Contract Law Jurisdictional Challenge Implied Contract Misnomer in Contract Arbitration Clause Incorporation

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 3 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SEA2011 Inc

Claimant

ICT Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Arbitration Challenge Under Section 67 Arbitration Act 1996 / Judgment on Jurisdictional Challenge

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether ICT Ltd was a party to the Sales Agency Agreement despite a misnomer
  2. 2 Whether SEA2011 Inc became a party to the Sales Agency Agreement by implied contract
  3. 3 Whether the Arbitrator had jurisdiction to determine the dispute based on the scope of the Notice of Arbitration

Ratio Decidendi

There was a clear mistake in the naming of ICT Ltd in the Sales Agency Agreement, which should be corrected to IN Ltd trading as ICT. The parties' conduct established an implied contract between SEA2011 Inc and ICT Ltd on the same terms as the Sales Agency Agreement, including the arbitration clause. The Arbitrator had jurisdiction as the implied contract argument fell within the scope of the Notice of Arbitration and/or was accepted by the parties during proceedings.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • The Arbitrator's awards are not set aside.
  • Declaration that the Arbitrator has jurisdiction.