Aiteo Eastern E & P Company Limited v Shell Western Supply and Trading Limited & Ors

Aiteo Eastern E & P Company Limited v Shell Western Supply and Trading Limited & Ors

The court found that there was apparent bias on the part of Dame Elizabeth Gloster due to the cumulative effect of multiple undisclosed and belatedly disclosed professional engagements with Freshfields, including arbitral appointments and expert instructions, some during the arbitration. The failures of disclosure, though inadvertent, were material and undermined the appearance of impartiality. The ICC Court's removal of DEG was not res judicata but was a relevant and persuasive factor. Substantial injustice was not shown in relation to the Offshore Jurisdiction Award or the Consolidation Award, as the former was reheard de novo by the court and the latter was independently decided by all...

Parties
Claimant: Aiteo Eastern E & P Company Limited; Defendant: Shell Western Supply and Trading Limited; Defendant: Africa Finance Corporation; Defendant: Ecobank Nigeria Limited; Defendant: Fidelity Bank PLC; Defendant: First Bank of Nigeria Limited; Defendant: Guaranty Trust Bank Limited; Defendant: Sterling Bank Limited; Defendant: Union Bank of Nigeria PLC; Defendant: Zenith Bank PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 January 2024
Procedural Posture
Commercial Arbitration Challenge (s.68 Arbitration Act 1996) / Judgment on Application to Set Aside Arbitral Awards and for Extension of Time
Outcome
Application allowed in part; extension of time granted; Onshore Jurisdiction Award remitted to tribunal for reconsideration; application dismissed as to other awards.
Legal Topics
Apparent Bias, Impartiality of Arbitrators, Disclosure Obligations, Res Judicata, Substantial Injustice, Extension of Time, Remedies Under Arbitration Act 1996
Arbitration Commercial Law Apparent Bias Impartiality of Arbitrators Disclosure Obligations Res Judicata Substantial Injustice Extension of Time +1 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 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Aiteo Eastern E & P Company Limited

Claimant

Shell Western Supply and Trading Limited

Defendant

Africa Finance Corporation

Defendant

Ecobank Nigeria Limited

Defendant

Fidelity Bank PLC

Defendant

First Bank of Nigeria Limited

Defendant

Guaranty Trust Bank Limited

Defendant

Sterling Bank Limited

Defendant

Union Bank of Nigeria PLC

Defendant

Zenith Bank PLC

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Arbitration Challenge (s.68 Arbitration Act 1996) / Judgment on Application to Set Aside Arbitral Awards and for Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was apparent bias on the part of arbitrator Dame Elizabeth Gloster (DEG) justifying setting aside arbitral awards under s.68(2)(a) Arbitration Act 1996
  2. 2 Whether the ICC Court's removal of DEG creates a res judicata or issue estoppel
  3. 3 Whether failures of disclosure by DEG constituted a serious irregularity

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that there was apparent bias on the part of Dame Elizabeth Gloster due to the cumulative effect of multiple undisclosed and belatedly disclosed professional engagements with Freshfields, including arbitral appointments and expert instructions, some during the arbitration. The failures of disclosure, though inadvertent, were material and undermined the appearance of impartiality. The ICC Court's removal of DEG was not res judicata but was a relevant and persuasive factor. Substantial injustice was not shown in relation to the Offshore Jurisdiction Award or the Consolidation Award, as the former was reheard de novo by the court and the latter was independently decided by all...

Court Disposition

Application allowed in part; extension of time granted; Onshore Jurisdiction Award remitted to tribunal for reconsideration; application dismissed as to other awards.

Orders

  • Extension of time for s.68 application granted.
  • Onshore Jurisdiction Award remitted to the reconstituted tribunal for reconsideration under s.68(3) Arbitration Act 1996.