- Incorporation of terms in international trade, Rome I and anti-suit injunctions in support of arbitration (Ulusoy Denizilik v Cofco)
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Case details
Arbitration analysis: On an application by Ulusoy Denizilil AS (Ulusoy Denizilik) (the owner of a vessel arrested in China), for a final anti-suit injunction in support of an arbitration agreement, Cofco Global Harvest (Zhangjiagang) Trading Co Ltd (Cofco) (the cargo receiver which had obtained the arrest in Chinese proceedings) argued that the terms of a charterparty containing an English law and London arbitration clause should be judged by reference to Chinese law. Cofco argued that it would be unreasonable to judge its conduct by reference to English law where it had become the bill of lading holder (and allegedly bound by the charterparty’s arbitration/governing law clause) without being aware of or seeing the relevant terms of any charterparty in the bills. Mr Justice Bryan rejected Cofco’s argument, holding that it would undermine practical arrangements which form an essential part of international trade. He also rejected an argument that the arbitration clause had been superseded and granted a final anti-suit injunction. Written by Alistair Mackenzie, barrister, at 2 Temple Gardens.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial