West Tankers v Allianz

The House of Lords referred to the ECJ the question whether a member state may grant an injunction against a person bound by an arbitration agreement to restrain them from commencing or pursuing proceedings in the courts of another member state with jurisdiction to hear the proceedings under the Brussels Regulation. The reference was made following a leapfrog appeal from the decision of Colman J granting an anti-suit injunction restraining the insurers from continuing with Italian proceedings.

 

Advocate General Kokott issued an opinion stating that the grant of anti-suit injunctions where court proceedings are brought in breach of an arbitration agreement was inconsistent with the Brussels Regulation regime. The ECJ held that it was incompatible with the Brussels Regulation to grant anti-suit injunctions restraining a party from commencing or continuing with proceedings in the court of an EU member state, where those proceedings are in breach of an arbitration agreement.

West Tankers obtained an arbitral award, declaring that they were not liable to insurers for the collision involving the Front Comor. West Tankers applied to the English court to enter judgment in terms of the award, with a view to using it to resist enforcement of any subsequent inconsistent judgment of the Italian courts.

Field J held that the English court had jurisdiction to enter judgment in terms of a declaratory award under section 66 of the Arbitration Act 1996, because this would make a positive contribution to the securing of the material benefit of the award. The Court of Appeal upheld Field J's decision, confirming that in an appropriate case, the court has power to enter judgment in terms of a declaratory award under section 66 of the AA 1996.

Source: PLC: http://uk.practicallaw.com/7-519-0058