Nomihold Securities Inc v Mobile Telesystems Finance SA [2012] EWHC 130 (Comm) (02 February 2012)

Nomihold Securities Inc v Mobile Telesystems Finance SA [2012] EWHC 130 (Comm) (02 February 2012)

The court has jurisdiction to grant an anti-arbitration injunction under section 37 of the Senior Courts Act 1981 to restrain arbitral proceedings that constitute a collateral attack on a prior award and are an abuse of process. Section 9 of the Arbitration Act 1996 does not require a stay of such proceedings because the application for an injunction invokes the court's supervisory jurisdiction, which is not a matter to be referred to arbitration. The new arbitrations sought by MTSF, to the extent they seek to re-litigate issues already determined or which could and should have been raised previously, are abusive and should be restrained. However, the court will not restrain claims that...

Citation
[2012] EWHC 130 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Nomihold Securities Inc; Defendant: Mobile Telesystems Finance SA
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 February 2012
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application for Final Injunction and Stay / Judgment on Applications for Anti Arbitration Injunction and Stay Under S.9 Arbitration Act 1996
Outcome
Claimant's application for anti-arbitration injunction granted in part; Defendant's application for stay refused.
Legal Topics
Anti Arbitration Injunctions, Res Judicata, Issue Estoppel, Abuse of Process, Supervisory Jurisdiction of English Courts, Section 37 Senior Courts Act 1981, Section 9 Arbitration Act 1996, Enforcement of Arbitral Awards
Arbitration Commercial Law Anti Arbitration Injunctions Res Judicata Issue Estoppel Abuse of Process Supervisory Jurisdiction of English Courts Section 37 Senior Courts Act 1981 +2 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 5 Authorities cited 24 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nomihold Securities Inc

Claimant

Mobile Telesystems Finance SA

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Application for Final Injunction and Stay / Judgment on Applications for Anti Arbitration Injunction and Stay Under S.9 Arbitration Act 1996

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court has jurisdiction under section 37 of the Senior Courts Act 1981 to grant an anti-arbitration injunction restraining arbitral proceedings that allegedly constitute a collateral attack on a prior award;
  2. 2 Whether the defendant is entitled to a stay of the claimant's application under section 9 of the Arbitration Act 1996;
  3. 3 Whether it is just and convenient to grant an anti-arbitration injunction in the circumstances;

Ratio Decidendi

The court has jurisdiction to grant an anti-arbitration injunction under section 37 of the Senior Courts Act 1981 to restrain arbitral proceedings that constitute a collateral attack on a prior award and are an abuse of process. Section 9 of the Arbitration Act 1996 does not require a stay of such proceedings because the application for an injunction invokes the court's supervisory jurisdiction, which is not a matter to be referred to arbitration. The new arbitrations sought by MTSF, to the extent they seek to re-litigate issues already determined or which could and should have been raised previously, are abusive and should be restrained. However, the court will not restrain claims that...

Court Disposition

Claimant's application for anti-arbitration injunction granted in part; Defendant's application for stay refused.

Orders

  • MTSF restrained from pursuing in the new arbitrations any claims that constitute a collateral attack on the prior award or are precluded by res judicata, issue estoppel, or the rule in Henderson v Henderson.
  • MTSF's application for a stay under section 9 of the Arbitration Act 1996 dismissed.