Shashoua and Another v Sharma
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Lord Justice Rix |
| Judgment Date | 13 January 2010 |
| Neutral Citation | [2010] EWCA Civ 15 |
| Docket Number | Case No: A3/2009/1113 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Civil Division) |
| Date | 13 January 2010 |
[2010] EWCA Civ 15
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE
COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM THE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
COMMERCIAL COURT
(Mr Justice Cooke)
Before: Lord Justice Rix
Case No: A3/2009/1113
Ms Sanita Patil Woolhouse (instructed by Singhania and Co) appeared on behalf of the Appellant.
THE RESPONDENT DID NOT APPEAR AND WAS NOT REPRESENTED.
Lord Justice Rix:
I am going to give limited permission to appeal in this case and so my judgment can be brief.
Mr Sharma, the applicant, has entered into an arbitration agreement with Mr Shashoua, the first respondent, and the other respondents, which has led to arbitration proceedings between the parties. The arbitration agreement provides for arbitration in England but the contract made between the parties is governed by Indian law.
The arbitration proceedings between the parties have led to certain interim or interlocutory awards concerning, I think, the payment of costs for the purposes of the arbitration and also concerning certain costs awards relating to interlocutory disputes between the parties. Those interim awards are sought to be enforced in this country at present by a charging order over a property belonging to Mr Sharma here. Mr Sharma has sought to challenge the awards in this country under the provisions of the Arbitration Act 1996, but unsuccessfully. In those circumstances he has commenced proceedings in India with a view, to put the matter broadly at any rate, to challenging the awards there.
As I understand the matter there are not at present enforcement proceedings in relation to the interim awards in India but it may be that when a final award is made in the arbitration proceedings, and I am told that such a final award is imminent, there may in due course be enforcement proceedings in India, as there might have to be if Mr Sharma's assets in this country were to prove insufficient to pay any such award that turns out to be made against him. It is as I understand it the possible imminence of a final award against Mr Sharma which is perhaps the practical impetus to the continuation of present proceedings in this court. That is because Mr Sharma's proceedings in India have led to the making of an anti-suit injunction against him in the commercial court, first by Andrew Smith J under his order of 29 January 2009, at that stage on...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Bank of New York Mellon v GV Films Ltd
-
U&M Mining Zambia Ltd v Konkola Copper Mines Plc
...However, given the view I take as to the contractual choice of seat, I need not determine that issue. 45 As Cooke J pointed out in Shashoua v Sharma [2009] 1 CLC 716 at [26], the concept of the "seat" is a fundamental one, and the seat can be different from the physical place in which the a......