CH Offshore Ltd v Internaves Consorcio Naviero SA & Ors

CH Offshore Ltd v Internaves Consorcio Naviero SA & Ors

Intermediary brokers in the position of Maritima/Internaves were not agents and owed no fiduciary duty to disclose underlying commercial positions; agreements for commission were not unenforceable for public policy or illegality as commissions were not secret and no dishonesty was found; settlement payments retained the character of 'Charter Hire' and triggered commission obligations under the agreements.

Parties
Claimant: CH Offshore Limited; Defendant: Internaves Consorcio Naviero SA; Defendant: Maritima Altair Petromar SA; Defendant: Lamat Offshore Marine Inc.
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Arbitration Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Under Section 69 Arbitration Act 1996
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Fiduciary Duties, Brokerage Commission, Illegality and Public Policy, Settlement Agreements, Disclosure Obligations
Arbitration Commercial Law Agency Law Fiduciary Duties Brokerage Commission Illegality and Public Policy Settlement Agreements 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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CH Offshore Limited

Claimant

Internaves Consorcio Naviero SA

Defendant

Maritima Altair Petromar SA

Defendant

Lamat Offshore Marine Inc.

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Arbitration Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Under Section 69 Arbitration Act 1996

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What duties are owed by an intermediary broker to its principals, specifically regarding disclosure obligations?
  2. 2 Is an agreement pursuant to which a broker and/or consultant received secret commission and/or other payments unenforceable on grounds of public policy or illegality?
  3. 3 Does a proportion of the sum paid under a settlement agreement retain the character of 'Charter Hire' so as to trigger commission and consultancy fees?

Ratio Decidendi

Intermediary brokers in the position of Maritima/Internaves were not agents and owed no fiduciary duty to disclose underlying commercial positions; agreements for commission were not unenforceable for public policy or illegality as commissions were not secret and no dishonesty was found; settlement payments retained the character of 'Charter Hire' and triggered commission obligations under the agreements.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed