Court Decisions

The court decisions available on this website interpret and apply the New York Convention. These court decisions are in most cases published in the Yearbook Commercial Arbitration since its Volume I (1976). 

Search options:

Court Decisions Search Engine

The court decisions available on this website interpret and apply the New York Convention.

  1. Most decisions are reported in the Yearbook Commercial Arbitration, published by ICCA since 1976, and are numbered as in the Yearbook (e.g., US no. 954).

  2. Other decisions are indicated by country, date, and a short name (e.g., UK 18 June 2020 Alexander Brothers).

Court decisions can be searched by country and by topic.

Court Decisions

Search Court Decisions

  • 2007 Antigua and Barbuda
    Excerpt Topics

    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.

    Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court, High Court of Justice (Civil), 13 July 2007, Claim No.: ANUHCV 0312/2005

    (VT Leaseco Limited v. Fast Ferry Leasing Limited et al.)


    The court discusses the meaning and effect of the referral of the resolution of disputes to arbitration, including: who can ask for referral and when, whether a party has waived its right to request arbitration, the defense that there was no contract at all; whether there was a condition precedent to the commencement of arbitration (e.g. mediation), stay of proceedings v. compelling arbitration, and national procedural specificities such as remand and removal (US), effect of class action. etc.

    Referral to arbitration in general