Shashoua & Ors v Sharma

Shashoua & Ors v Sharma

London is the juridical seat of the arbitration and English law is the curial law. The parties agreed to the exclusive supervisory jurisdiction of the English courts over the arbitration. The defendant's proceedings in India to challenge the Costs Award and related enforcement orders are in breach of this agreement. Subject to unresolved factual disputes regarding submission to Indian jurisdiction and non-disclosure, this is a paradigm case for a perpetual anti-suit injunction restraining the defendant from challenging the award or enforcement outside England and Wales, except on grounds permitted by Article V of the New York Convention.

Parties
Claimant: Roger Shashoua; Claimant: Rodemadan Holdings Limited; Claimant: Stancroft Trust Limited; Defendant: Mukesh Sharma
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 May 2009
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Arbitration Related Application / Inter Partes Hearing of Application for Anti Suit Injunction
Outcome
Interim anti-suit injunction continued; final decision deferred pending determination of factual disputes regarding submission to Indian jurisdiction and non-disclosure.
Legal Topics
Anti Suit Injunctions, Jurisdiction of Courts, Enforcement of Arbitral Awards, Submission to Foreign Jurisdiction, Non Disclosure in Ex Parte Applications
Arbitration Conflict of Laws Commercial Law Anti Suit Injunctions Jurisdiction of Courts Enforcement of Arbitral Awards Submission to Foreign Jurisdiction Non Disclosure in Ex Parte Applications

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Roger Shashoua

Claimant

Rodemadan Holdings Limited

Claimant

Stancroft Trust Limited

Claimant

Mukesh Sharma

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Arbitration Related Application / Inter Partes Hearing of Application for Anti Suit Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the English court should grant a perpetual anti-suit injunction restraining the defendant from challenging or impugning enforcement of an interim arbitration award and related court orders outside England and Wales
  2. 2 Whether London is the juridical seat of the arbitration and English law the curial law
  3. 3 Whether the claimants submitted to the jurisdiction of the Indian courts

Ratio Decidendi

London is the juridical seat of the arbitration and English law is the curial law. The parties agreed to the exclusive supervisory jurisdiction of the English courts over the arbitration. The defendant's proceedings in India to challenge the Costs Award and related enforcement orders are in breach of this agreement. Subject to unresolved factual disputes regarding submission to Indian jurisdiction and non-disclosure, this is a paradigm case for a perpetual anti-suit injunction restraining the defendant from challenging the award or enforcement outside England and Wales, except on grounds permitted by Article V of the New York Convention.

Court Disposition

Interim anti-suit injunction continued; final decision deferred pending determination of factual disputes regarding submission to Indian jurisdiction and non-disclosure.

Orders

  • The anti-suit injunction restraining the defendant from challenging, impugning, or seeking to prevent or delay enforcement of the Costs Award and related English court orders outside England and Wales is continued, subject to liberty to apply for permission to challenge recognition or enforcement under Article V of...
  • Directions to be given for a further hearing to determine factual disputes regarding submission to Indian jurisdiction and non-disclosure.