header-logo header-logo

05 September 2014
Issue: 7620 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Shipping

Viscous Global Investment Ltd v Palladium Navigation Corporation [2014] EWHC 2654 (Comm), [2014] All ER (D) 295 (Jul)

The parties contracted to transport rice under bills of lading that contained a number of different arbitration clauses. The claimant sought security from the defendant, which sent a letter of understanding setting out an arbitration procedure. A dispute arose as to alleged damage to the rice. The defendant submitted that the letter was not to be relied upon in determining how the arbitration should be carried out. The Commercial Court held that the claimant had validly commenced arbitration and the arbitral tribunal had jurisdiction to determine all the claims made by the claimant under the bills of lading.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Ward Hadaway—19 promotions

Ward Hadaway—19 promotions

19 promotions across national offices, including two new partners

Brabners—Ruth Hargreaves

Brabners—Ruth Hargreaves

Partner promoted to head of corporate team

Slater Heelis—Liam Hall, Jordan Bear & Joe Madigan

Slater Heelis—Liam Hall, Jordan Bear & Joe Madigan

Chester office expansion accelerates with triple appointment

NEWS
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys has reignited debate over what exactly counts as the ‘conduct of litigation’ in modern legal practice
A controversial High Court financial remedies ruling has reignited debate over secrecy, non-disclosure and fairness in divorce proceedings involving hidden wealth
Britain’s deferred prosecution agreement regime is undergoing a significant shift, with prosecutors placing renewed emphasis on corporate cooperation, reform and early self-reporting
The High Court has upheld the Metropolitan Police’s live facial recognition policy, rejecting claims that its deployment unlawfully interferes with privacy and protest rights
As AI chatbots increasingly provide legal and commercial advice, English law is beginning to confront who should bear responsibility when automated systems get things wrong
back-to-top-scroll