Halki Shipping Corporation v Sopex Oils Ltd
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Hirst,Henry,Swinton Thomas L JJ |
| Judgment Date | 19 December 1998 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Civil Division) |
| Date | 19 December 1998 |
Court of Appeal
Before Lord Justice Hirst, Lord Justice Henry and Lord Justice Swinton Thomas
Arbitration - whether dispute within arbitration clause - defendant entitled to stay of court proceedings
A defendant who was a party to an arbitration agreement was entitled to a stay of court proceedings unless the court was satisfied that the action was not brought in respect of the matter referred to arbitration or was brought under an agreement which was null and void, inoperative or incapable of being performed.
The Court of Appeal so held by a majority, Lord Justice Hirst dissenting, dismissing an appeal by the plaintiffs, Halki Shipping Corporation, against a decision of Mr Justice Clarke (The Times October 13, 1997; [1997] TLR 506; [1997] 1 WLR 1268) granting an application by the defendants, Sopex Oils Ltd, for a stay of the plaintiffs' action for US$498,852.43 in respect of demurrage claimed as a result of failure to load and discharge the vessel Halki within the laytime provided in a tanker voyage charterparty dated June 20, 1995.
The charterparty provided for arbitration. The plaintiffs had issued a summons under Order 14 of the Rules of the Supreme Court for judgment for the amount claimed in the action.
Section 9 of the Arbitration Act 1996 provides: "(1) A party to an arbitration agreement against whom legal proceedings are brought (whether by way of claim or counterclaim) in respect of a matter which under the agreement is to be referred to arbitration may (upon notice to the other parties to the proceedings) apply to the court in which the proceedings have been brought to stay the proceedings so far as they concern that matter…
"(4) On an application under this section the court shall grant a stay unless satisfied that the arbitration agreement is null and void, inoperative, or incapable of being performed."
Mr...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bankamerica Trust v Trans-World Telecom Holdings
...Bros. (Pty.) Ltd. v. Klinger, [1982] 1 W.L.R. 1375; [1982] 2 All E.R. 737, not followed. (2) Halki Shipping Corp. v. Sopex Oils Ltd., [1998] 1 W.L.R. 726; [1998] 2 All E.R. 23, not followed. (3) Investors” Compensation Scheme Ltd. v. West Bromwich Bldg. Socy., [1998] 1 W.L.R. 896; [1998] 1 ......
-
Salford Estates (No. 2) Ltd v Altomart Ltd
...section 9 trumped the decision he would otherwise have made to dismiss the application to restrain the presentation of the petition. 21 Halki Shipping concerned a claim for demurrage under a charterparty, which contained an arbitration agreement. The defendant, which did not admit liabili......
-
Wealands v CLC Contractors Ltd
...dealt with in the previous legislation. Sections 1, 46 and 48Chandris v Isbrandtsen-Moller Co IncELR [1951] 1 KB 240. Halki Shipping Corp v Sopex Oils Ltd [1998] CLC 583; [1998] 1 WLR 726. India (President of) v La Pintada Compania Navigacion SAELR [1985] AC 104. Ram Dutt Ramkissendass v E ......
-
XPL Engineering Ltd v K & J Townmore Construction Ltd
...of that amendment was considered by the Court of Appeal of England and Wales in Halki Shipping Corporation v. Sopex Oils Ltd [1998] 1 WLR 726 ( “The Halki”). In The Halki, a majority of the Court of Appeal held that the English 1996 Act had altered the law in that jurisdiction which had pr......
-
Arbitration - Should courts get involved?
...and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, New York, 10 June 1958. 11Art. 8(1). 12 Halki Shipping Corp. -v- Sopex Oils Ltd. [1998] 1 W.L.R. 726; [1998] 2 All E.R. 13Arbitration Act, 1969, s. 32(1)(b). 14Arbitration Act, 1969, s. 67. 2002] Arbitration 38 B. Serious Irregularity This head, e......