Howden & Co., Ltd v. Powell Duffryn Steam Coat, Co., Ltd [1912] ScotLR 605 (20 March 1912)

Howden & Co., Ltd v. Powell Duffryn Steam Coat, Co., Ltd [1912] ScotLR 605 (20 March 1912)

The dispute did not arise until the pursuers repudiated the rejection, and their letter constituted notice of the dispute within the meaning of the arbitration clause. The arbitration clause was therefore applicable, and the action was sisted to allow arbitration. The plea of forum non conveniens was repelled as the defenders failed to show that England was clearly more suitable. The engineer's certificate was not a condition precedent to payment under the contract.

Citation
[1912] ScotLR 605
Parties
Pursuer: Howden & Company, Limited; Defender: Powell Duffryn Steam Coal Company, Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
20 March 1912
Procedural Posture
Commercial Contract Dispute / Inner House, First Division, Reclaiming Note Against Lord Ordinary's Interlocutor
Outcome
Court adhered to Lord Ordinary's interlocutor; action sisted for arbitration; plea of forum non conveniens repelled.
Legal Topics
Arbitration Clause Construction, Forum Non Conveniens, Condition Precedent, Jurisdiction, Interpretation of Contract Terms
Contract Law Arbitration Civil Procedure Arbitration Clause Construction Forum Non Conveniens Condition Precedent Jurisdiction Interpretation of Contract Terms

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Howden & Company, Limited

Pursuer

Powell Duffryn Steam Coal Company, Limited

Defender

Procedural Posture

Commercial Contract Dispute / Inner House, First Division, Reclaiming Note Against Lord Ordinary's Interlocutor

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitration clause was applicable given the notice requirements
  2. 2 Whether the Scottish courts should decline jurisdiction on grounds of forum non conveniens
  3. 3 Whether the engineer's certificate was a condition precedent to payment under the contract

Ratio Decidendi

The dispute did not arise until the pursuers repudiated the rejection, and their letter constituted notice of the dispute within the meaning of the arbitration clause. The arbitration clause was therefore applicable, and the action was sisted to allow arbitration. The plea of forum non conveniens was repelled as the defenders failed to show that England was clearly more suitable. The engineer's certificate was not a condition precedent to payment under the contract.

Court Disposition

Court adhered to Lord Ordinary's interlocutor; action sisted for arbitration; plea of forum non conveniens repelled.

Orders

  • Action sisted in hoc statu for arbitration in terms of the contract.
  • Plea of forum non conveniens repelled.