Multi-party disputes: Consolidation under English law The Vimeira - a Sad Forensic Fable

Abstract

over Christmas 1980 the vessel Vimeira discharged a cargo of grain at a dock called the Rodenhuizedok in the port of Ghent, having berthed at night stern first with the assistance of pilot and tugs following a turning manoeuvre at the dock entrance. When the vessel left the dock, her rudder was found to have suffered serious damage causing substantial losses to her Owners. Disputes over this incident between the Owners and three other interested parties were referred separately to two arbitrations in London where they became the subject of extensive legal proceedings in the English courts between the Owners, the Time Charterers and the Voyage Charterers of the vessel, and to litigation in Belgium between the Owners and the Ghent Port Authority which was not party to any arbitration agreement. The London arbitrations are a classic lesson in the problems of multi-party disputes arising from the same incident. The case re-affirms the need for some mechanism for ‘consolidation’ of related arbitrations between different parties, both where a claimant claims against multiple respondents and where a respondent claims relief against a third party, which was the case in The Vimeira . These problems exist in every arbitral jurisdiction; and a comprehensive practical solution remains elusive for a number of reasons. In England and other countries enacting the 1958 New York Arbitration Convention, the separate problem exists of related disputes covered by concurrent arbitration and litigation where consolidated court proceedings are thwarted by one party applying for a mandatory stay pursuant to an arbitration agreement with another party, leaving in the litigation other disputants not party to a similar arbitration agreement.1 In The Vimeira this further problem is evident from the separate Belgian proceedings brought by the Owners against the Ghent Port Authority alone; and it has no apparent solution. …