Find a Barrister

Find an Arbitrator

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
people

Contact

Contact with chambers should be made through the Practice Management Team. They are happy to discuss client requirements and provide further information on such matters as the expertise and experience of individual members, fees, working practices and languages spoken. We have members able to work in French, German, Italian, Spanish, Dutch, Swedish, Greek and Chinese (Mandarin).

Outside working hours, a member of our team is always available to be contacted on matters of an urgent nature. Contact should be made using the Chambers main number or email.

To contact our Singapore office, please contact our BD Director, Asia, Rachel Foxton. Out of office hours calls will automatically be diverted to our clerking team in London.

London

Twenty Essex Street
London
WC2R 3AL

enquiries@twentyessex.com
t: +44 20 7842 1200
DX 0009 Lond/Chan Lane

Singapore

28 Maxwell Road
#02-03
Maxwell Chambers Suites
Singapore 069120

singapore@twentyessex.com
t: +65 62257230

Contact

Contact with chambers should be made through the Practice Management Team. They are happy to discuss client requirements and provide further information on such matters as the expertise and experience of individual members, fees, working practices and languages spoken. We have members able to work in French, German, Italian, Spanish, Dutch, Swedish, Greek and Chinese (Mandarin).

Outside working hours, a member of our team is always available to be contacted on matters of an urgent nature. Contact should be made using the Chambers main number or email.

To contact our Singapore office, please contact our BD Director, Asia, Rachel Foxton. Out of office hours calls will automatically be diverted to our clerking team in London.

London

Twenty Essex Street
London
WC2R 3AL

enquiries@twentyessex.com
t: +44 20 7842 1200
DX 0009 Lond/Chan Lane

Singapore

28 Maxwell Road
#02-03
Maxwell Chambers Suites
Singapore 069120

singapore@twentyessex.com
t: +65 62257230

17/02/2015

Shipowners' Mutual Protection and Indemnity Association (Luxembourg) v Containerships Denizcilik Nakliyat Ve Ticaret A.S. [2015] 1 Lloyd's Rep 567

This is an archived article, and some links may not work. Contact us if you have any questions.

David Lewis QC and Oliver Caplin acted for the defendant charterers (“Containerships”) in this case about an anti-suit injunction restraining direct action proceedings in Turkey against an international P&I Club (“the Club”).

The Club had obtained a without notice anti-suit injunction to restrain Containerships from pursuing the proceedings in Turkey (the “Turkish Proceedings”). The Club wished any proceedings to be in London, where it could rely on the “pay to be paid” provision in its Club Rules, which were part of the shipowners’ P&I Cover. The Club contended that the Turkish Proceedings would be in breach of the arbitration clause contained in their Club Rules, and that in any event the Turkish Proceedings were vexatious and oppressive in nature, and ought to be restrained.

On the with notice return date, Teare J characterised the direct action claim in the Turkish Proceedings as contractual in nature. However, the Judge held that as Containerships itself was not a party to that P&I Cover, it could not be said to be in breach of the arbitration agreement contained therein. The Club’s primary case, that it was entitled to an anti-suit injunction to restrain a breach of contract, failed.

The alternative case then asked whether Containerships’ conduct in bringing the Turkish Proceedings was “vexatious and oppressive” such that they ought nevertheless to be restrained.

Teare J concluded that the Turkish Proceedings were vexatious and oppressive because the Club was being deprived of the contractual rights it had bargained for under its P&I Cover with the shipowners (ie. the right to arbitrate, and rely on the “pay to be paid” rule). For the time-being, the Judgment may fortify P&I clubs who wish to rely on the “pay to be paid” rule.

However, recognising the difficult nature of the law in this area on the approach to characterisation and to what amounts to vexatious and oppressive conduct, Teare J granted permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal on both issues.


Share