Reflections upon reviewing 1000 arbitration reports under the LMAA Terms (1979-2023), Prokopios Krikris FCIArb, LMAA Supporting Member
Over 1000 LMAA award summaries under the LMAA terms dealing with disputes that arose under charter parties or bills of lading contracts, contracts for ship sales, shipbuilding and repair, and other agreements are currently available online.
The London Maritime Arbitrators Association (LMAA) has shared on their website two tables that set out statistics for the number of appointments received, arbitrations run, and awards published. The statistics cover these periods: (1) 1983-1996 (LMAA-APPOINTMENTS-AND-AWARDS-1983-1996.pdf) and (2) 1996-2023 (Statistics-up-to-2023-for-publication.pdf (lmaa.london)
Approximately 20-25% of the cases referred to arbitration proceed to an award. The parties usually settle the case during the various stages of the reference. Less than 5% of these awards will likely be published as a summary in Lloyds’ Maritime Law Newsletter (LMLN), the only newsletter that regularly includes anonymized LMAA summaries. LMLN published the first award summaries in 1979.
My guidebook “ charterpartydisputes.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/A-LIST-OF-890-LMAA-PUBLISHED-AWARDS-1979-2022-PROKOPIOS-KRIKRIS.pdf “ provides in chronological order the awards from 1979-2022 ( circa 890 awards), and in 2023, LMLN published 18 arbitration reports. In total, there are over 900 award summaries in LMLN up to date. In the guidebook, the readers can find an overview of the common issues involved in these awards under ten major categories: 1. Arbitration Practice, 2. Laytime and demurrage, 3. Hire payment- lien- redelivery- repudiation, 4. Speed and Performance, 5. Off-hire, 6. Bunkers, 7. Clause 8( NYPE), 8. Cargo Claims, 9. Stevedores and 10. Extra insurance.
Jus Mundi
Jus Mundi shares full copies of LMAA awards on their website. It seems that these awards mostly come into the public domain through enforcement under the NYC 1958. Article VI provides that
“To obtain the recognition and enforcement mentioned in the preceding article, the party applying for recognition and enforcement shall, at the time of the application, supply:
The duly authenticated original award or a duly certified copy thereof;
……
“
The operative provisions of the Convention have been transposed into the law of England and Wales by Part III of the Arbitration Act 1996.
In brief, the published awards in Jus Mundi (Jus Mundi | Search Engine for International Law and Arbitration) illustrate some procedural issues concerning (i) default appointments; (ii) challenges to jurisdiction, (iii) preliminary issues- applications for Partial Final Award (The Kostas Melas) and admitted sums due, and (iv) party’s failure to cooperate & participate in arbitration.
Respondents chose not to participate in the arbitration
The tribunal’s approach in conducting the proceedings was to be mindful of its duty under section 33 of the Arbitration Act 1996. Tribunals did their best to give Respondents the opportunity to put their case, and also to avoid unnecessary delay (conducting a balancing exercise).
In particular:
The tribunal asked the Claimants to reconfirm that the orders were communicated to the Respondents;
The tribunal gave sufficient notices/ orders to the Respondents before issuing an order in final and peremptory terms- s.41(7), Arbitration Act 1996 was the preferred sanction for non-compliance;
Prima facie, it was for the claimant to satisfy the tribunal as to the validity of the claim advanced;
The tribunal rejected /disallowed any parts of the claim or its amount in respect of which was not satisfied;
It was not its role to do the Respondents’ job in defending the claim.
The tribunal asked the claimant to submit further evidence and clarifications when required. If the defending party fails to participate, the tribunal must test the evidence to satisfy itself that the claimant has a case.
A strange and uncommon case that illustrates the tribunal’s challenging balancing exercise ( avoid delay vs give an opportunity to put his case) and how efficiently dealt with it: London Arbitration- managing unnecessary delay – Charter Party Disputes