A.K.Kablo Imalat SAN VE TIC A.S. v Intamex S.A.

A.K.Kablo Imalat SAN VE TIC A.S. v Intamex S.A.

The tribunal did not find an express or implied agreement as to the pricing mechanism for provisional invoices as alleged by the buyer, nor did it find a variation of such an agreement. The tribunal's findings were consistent with the contract and the parties' arguments. There was no serious irregularity or error of law. The buyer's challenge under section 68 and application for leave to appeal under section 69 are dismissed.

Parties
Claimant: A. K. Kablo Imalat San Ve Tic A. S.; Defendant: Intamex S. A.
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 November 2011
Procedural Posture
Commercial Arbitration Challenge / Judgment on Application to Set Aside Arbitration Award and for Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Application dismissed; leave to appeal refused; request to remit award refused.
Legal Topics
Challenge to Arbitration Award, Serious Irregularity Under Section 68 Arbitration Act 1996, Leave to Appeal Under Section 69 Arbitration Act 1996, Contractual Interpretation, Implied Terms, Repudiation of Contract
Arbitration Commercial Law Challenge to Arbitration Award Serious Irregularity Under Section 68 Arbitration Act 1996 Leave to Appeal Under Section 69 Arbitration Act 1996 Contractual Interpretation Implied Terms Repudiation of Contract

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A. K. Kablo Imalat San Ve Tic A. S.

Claimant

Intamex S. A.

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Arbitration Challenge / Judgment on Application to Set Aside Arbitration Award and for Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitral tribunal committed a serious irregularity under section 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996 by deciding on a variation of an implied term not argued by the parties
  2. 2 Whether there was an implied or express agreement as to the pricing mechanism for provisional invoices
  3. 3 Whether the tribunal erred in law in its findings on termination and repudiation of contract

Ratio Decidendi

The tribunal did not find an express or implied agreement as to the pricing mechanism for provisional invoices as alleged by the buyer, nor did it find a variation of such an agreement. The tribunal's findings were consistent with the contract and the parties' arguments. There was no serious irregularity or error of law. The buyer's challenge under section 68 and application for leave to appeal under section 69 are dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; leave to appeal refused; request to remit award refused.

Orders

  • Challenge to the award under section 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996 is dismissed.
  • Leave to appeal the award under section 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996 is refused.