Navigation Maritime Bulgare v Rustal Trading Ltd (The Ivan Zagubanski) [2000] EWHC 222 (Comm) (16 November 2000)

Navigation Maritime Bulgare v Rustal Trading Ltd (The Ivan Zagubanski) [2000] EWHC 222 (Comm) (16 November 2000)

The claims for a declaration as to the validity and binding effect of the arbitration clause and for an anti-suit injunction fall within the arbitration exception in Article 1(4) of the Brussels and Lugano Conventions. The English court therefore has jurisdiction under CPR Part 6.20(5) and the Arbitration Practice Direction. The arbitration clause is incorporated into the bills of lading and binds the defendants, including insurers claiming by subrogation. There is no strong reason to refuse the anti-suit injunction.

Citation
[2000] EWHC 222 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Navigation Maritime Bulgare; Defendant: Rustal Trading Limited (Ireland); Defendant: Axa Global Risks; Defendant: AGF Mat S. A.; Defendant: S. I. A. T.; Defendant: Le Continent S. A.; Defendant: Groupama Navigation & Transports; Defendant: Rustal Trading Limited (BVI); Defendant: Hilal Bitar Group t/a Al Bitar Trading; Defendant: Al Bitar Group t/a Al Bitar Trading; Defendant: Al Bitar Trading Est
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 November 2000
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Proceedings (anti Suit Injunction and Declaration) / Judgment on Application for Continuation of Anti Suit Injunction and Jurisdictional Challenge
Outcome
Anti-suit injunction continued against First to Fifth Defendants; jurisdictional challenge dismissed.
Legal Topics
Anti Suit Injunctions, Arbitration Agreements, Jurisdiction Under Brussels and Lugano Conventions, Incorporation of Arbitration Clauses, Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Navigation Maritime Bulgare

Claimant

Rustal Trading Limited (Ireland)

Defendant

Axa Global Risks

Defendant

AGF Mat S. A.

Defendant

S. I. A. T.

Defendant

Le Continent S. A.

Defendant

Groupama Navigation & Transports

Defendant

Rustal Trading Limited (BVI)

Defendant

Hilal Bitar Group t/a Al Bitar Trading

Defendant

Al Bitar Group t/a Al Bitar Trading

Defendant

Al Bitar Trading Est

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Proceedings (anti Suit Injunction and Declaration) / Judgment on Application for Continuation of Anti Suit Injunction and Jurisdictional Challenge

  1. 1 Whether the English court has jurisdiction to grant an anti-suit injunction against defendants domiciled in Brussels/Lugano Convention states
  2. 2 Whether claims for anti-suit injunction and declaration fall within the 'arbitration exception' in Article 1(4) of the Brussels and Lugano Conventions
  3. 3 Whether the arbitration clause is incorporated into the bills of lading and binds the defendants

Ratio Decidendi

The claims for a declaration as to the validity and binding effect of the arbitration clause and for an anti-suit injunction fall within the arbitration exception in Article 1(4) of the Brussels and Lugano Conventions. The English court therefore has jurisdiction under CPR Part 6.20(5) and the Arbitration Practice Direction. The arbitration clause is incorporated into the bills of lading and binds the defendants, including insurers claiming by subrogation. There is no strong reason to refuse the anti-suit injunction.

Court Disposition

Anti-suit injunction continued against First to Fifth Defendants; jurisdictional challenge dismissed.

Orders

  • Continuation of anti-suit injunction against First to Fifth Defendants
  • Jurisdictional challenge by First to Fifth Defendants dismissed