National General Insurance Company N.v v. Cove Castles Ltd

• Jurisdiction: Anguilla
• Court: High Court (Saint Christopher, Nevis And Anguilla)
• Judge: Saunders, J.
• Judgment Date: 26 June 1997
• Neutral Citation: AI 1997 HC 3
• Docket Number: 12 of 1997
• Date: 26 June 1997

High Court

Saunders, J.

12 of 1997

National General Insurance Co. N.V.

and

Cove Castles Limited

Appearances:

Mr. T. Astaphan for the Plaintiff.

Ms. J. Kentish for the Defendant.

Injunction - Arbitration proceedings — Whether the arbitrator appointed should be the sole arbitration — Plaintiffs do not agree that this should be so while the defendants so agree — Ex parte arbitrator restraining the application proceedings pending the determination of the originating summons — Injunction granted sought to be set aside — Court found no urgency in the matter and discharged the injunction.

Saunders, J.

1 This is the third round of proceedings in the High Court between these parties. The Plaintiffs were the Defendants' insurers, Differences arose between them following the passage of Hurricane Luis. The insurance contract provided for resolution of all differences by arbitration. The arbitration procedure is bogged down by all manner of procedural matters. There is an originating summons pending before this court. That summons seeks, inter alia, an injunction restraining a Mr. Danny Rowland from attempting to

2 convene the arbitration with Mr. Rowland acting as sole arbitrator.

3 The Defendants are understandably concerned about the length of time it is taking for their claims to be settled by arbitration. They decided to do something about that. In the proceedings begun by originating summons they filed an interlocutory application. They sought an order from the court that the insurers pay to them the sum of US$565,000.00 or such other sum as the court considers just as “an interim payment on account”. They ground their application on the basis that they have suffered loss; that the Plaintiffs admit liability but only dispute the quantum; and that the arbitral panel “will indubitably [make] an award substantially in excess of the amount of the interim payment”.

4 When this application came on for hearing, counsel for the Plaintiffs submitted that the court had no jurisdiction to entertain it. I adjourned the matter for a few hours to give counsel for the Defendants some time to respond to this submission.

5 Act Number 7 of 1977 stipulates that the relevant Arbitration Act in force in Anguilla is the 1950 U.K. Arbitration Act as amended. Counsel for the Defendants candidly conceded that there is nothing in the 1950 Act which specifically confers upon the court the power to order that an interim payment be made. However, says counsel, the court does have the power to stay arbitration proceedings and the court should assume the correlative power of proceeding imposing terms on the exercise of the power to stay. The substantive originating summons pending before the court, counsel continued, is in effect an application to stay the arbitration proceedings and the court should therefore impose terms on that stay. The terms should be that interim payments be made by the Plaintiffs.

6 Counsel then turned her attention to Order 29 Rules 10 and 12 of the Rules of the Supreme Court. She argued that those Rules are relevant and applicable. She urged the court to treat those Rules in the same manner as would be done if this were an action filed by writ in the High Court.

7 Mr. Astaphan, for the Plaintiffs, responded by insisting that Order 29 relates only to actions begun by writ for damages, debt or the like. He says that the court cannot and ought not to treat Order 29 as being applicable to arbitration proceedings. The issue in dispute between the...