VT Leaseco and Fast Ferry had entered into an Agreement to build three vessels to a design supplied by Fast Ferry. The Agreement provided that Fast Ferry would subsequently execute a bareboat charterparty for each vessel; it also provided that claims against VT Leaseco would be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the English courts, that claims against Fast Ferry would be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of those courts, and that disputes directly related to the bareboat charterparties would be referred to arbitration in London. The three vessels were built and the parties entered into three bareboat charterparties as provided for in the Agreement. In accordance with the clause in the Agreement, the charterparties provided for arbitration of disputes in London. Disputes arose and VT Leaseco commenced court proceedings in the High Court of Antigua and Barbuda in respect of the possession of the vessels, as well as arbitration in London in respect of damages. The High Court found that any dispute directly concerning the charterparties had to be decided by arbitration in London; it rejected Fast Ferry’s argument that the court proceedings constituted abuse of process because of the London arbitration commenced by VTL. The Court noted that it had no reason to doubt VTL’s claim that while the present court proceedings related to possession of the vessels, arbitration dealt with the question of damages.