Court finds interim relief obtained from foreign court breached arbitration agreement

Insights / / London

Aquavita International S.A. v Indagro SA (Aquavita Eternity) [2022] EWHC 892 (Comm)

The English Court has granted an anti-suit injunction to restrain court proceedings brought in Brazil because they breached a charterparty arbitration provision. Anti-suit relief was appropriate because the relief obtained from the Brazilian Court had not been sought in support of substantive proceedings elsewhere but in effect amounted to a determination that left nothing substantive to be decided in arbitration.

The background facts

In November 2021, the Owners voyage chartered their vessel to carry a cargo of ammonium sulphate from Qinghuangdao, China to two or three ports in Brazil. The Charterers were also the buyers of the bulk of the intended cargo. The shippers under the bills of lading were the sellers of the cargo.

In January 2022, the shippers notified the Owners that the Charterers had not made payment under the sale contract and so the bills of lading had not been released to them. The shippers instructed the Owners not to discharge the cargo except against presentation of the original bills of lading.

Part of the cargo was to be discharged at Sao Francisco do Sul, Brazil. In March 2022, the Charterers sought a “preliminary injunction” and obtained an order from the local Brazilian Court compelling the Owners to discharge the relevant portion of the cargo or face a daily fine as well as potential criminal sanctions. The Charterers had argued that the refusal to discharge was illegal and breached the Brazilian Civil and Commercial Code. The court order required delivery of the cargo to the alleged receivers directly as opposed to discharge into a warehouse under the Owners’ control.

The charterparty provided for London arbitration and also expressly made any bills of lading issued under it subject to London arbitration. The Owners, therefore, sought an anti-suit injunction in the English Court, requiring the Charterers to withdraw the Brazilian proceedings, set aside the Brazilian court order and refrain from commencing any further proceedings in respect of the balance of cargo. The Charterers resisted the application,  arguing that the Brazilian proceedings were interim measures only and so there was no breach of the arbitration provision.

The judge did not grant an injunction with respect to the cargo at Sao Francisco do Sul (as discharge was almost complete) but he did grant one in respect of the balance of cargo to be discharged subsequently at Rio Grande. At the return date, the Court considered whether to continue the anti-suit injunction.

The Commercial Court Decision

The Court stated that as a matter of English law, proceedings brought in any jurisdiction other than the agreed forum (i.e. a non-contractual forum) for the purposes of obtaining security for a claim to be advanced in the agreed forum, will not in general be considered a breach of the arbitration agreement or subject to anti-suit injunctive relief. That principle was applicable not only in the context of the arrest of a vessel but also in relation to proceedings commenced in a non-contractual forum to obtain security for a claim in some other form (e.g. freezing order or similar relief). However, proceedings which went beyond simply seeking reasonable security would constitute a breach of the arbitration clause which the English courts would restrain. In determining the nature of the foreign proceedings for these purposes, the Court would consider the following:

  1. Whether the non-contractual court was concerned with reaching a final (as opposed to an interim) decision on the merits of the claim;
  2. Whether the relief sought (even on an interim basis) was not the type which should instead follow from the final enforcement of substantive rights and obligations e.g. the payment of a debt; and
  3. Whether the relief sought could be said to be in aid of the substantive proceedings in the agreed forum and of limited value if those proceedings were not advanced to an award, judgment or settlement.

While the interim nature of security applications in foreign proceedings was the reason why they did not merit anti-suit relief, the Court would consider the substance (rather than form) of the proceedings in the non-contractual forum. Such proceedings would constitute a breach of the choice of forum clause if they amounted to an attempt to outflank the arbitration agreement.

Here, the steps in Brazil were not taken with a view to obtaining security in support of the London arbitration. The Court accepted that the mere fact that the relief sought was the interim performance of a substantive obligation did not, per se, render the proceedings in Brazil a breach of the arbitration agreement. However, in its view, the Brazilian court order amounted to a practical determination of the Charterers’ argument that the Owners were obliged to discharge the cargo such that it left nothing substantive to be decided in the London arbitration (except perhaps a complaint by the Owners that the Brazilian court order should not have been made).

Consequently, the order was not made “in support of” the London arbitration but was instead an attempt to oust the arbitration agreement. Therefore, the Court continued the anti-suit injunction.


The English Court has once again demonstrated its willingness to restrain breaches of London arbitration agreements by issuing anti-suit injunctions as appropriate. Those who commence proceedings in a non-contractual forum will need to consider carefully whether those proceedings merely seek to “hold the ring” pending a determination by the agreed tribunal or whether they directly or indirectly render the arbitration clause ineffective.

In a shipping context specifically, some jurisdictions in which vessels are arrested for security may require what essentially amount to substantive proceedings on the merits to be advanced following the arrest, otherwise the vessel might be released.

Joanna Steele

Joanna Steele Partner

Natalie Dabdoub

Natalie Dabdoub Senior Associate

Related sectors:

Related news & insights

News / One-off pilot error did not render port unsafe

21-03-2023 / Maritime

In this charterparty dispute, the arbitral tribunal rejected the Owners’ claim for damages for breach of the safe port warranty in a time charterparty, after a laden bulk carrier grounded at the entrance to the port of Chaozhou, China, while under compulsory pilotage. It also held that the vessel was unseaworthy, in breach of Article III.1 of the Hague Rules, due to lack of proper charts, but found on the facts that this was not causative of the grounding.

One-off pilot error did not render port unsafe

News / UK’s Electronic Trade Documents Bill progresses through Parliament

15-03-2023 / Maritime

On 15 March 2022, the UK’s Law Commission published its report, with draft legislation, for the legal recognition of electronic trade documents. One year later, the Electronic Trade Documents Bill introduced to the House of Lords is at the Report stage of the legislative process.

UK’s Electronic Trade Documents Bill progresses through Parliament

News / Court declines further adjournment of contempt application against sanctioned defendant

07-03-2023 / Maritime

In the recent case of PJSC National Bank Trust v. Boris Mints, the Court confirmed that sanctioned entities have a fundamental right of access to the English courts. In this case, the Court has made it clear that a defendant will not be permitted to delay any legitimate proceedings against him beyond what is reasonable on the basis that his sanctioned status may prevent him getting a fair trial.

Court declines further adjournment of contempt application against sanctioned defendant

News / Court finds hold reinspection should have been arranged with reasonable diligence

01-03-2023 / Maritime

On appeal from an arbitration award, the Court has agreed with the tribunal that there should be an implied term in the charterparty regarding the charterers’ obligations to arrange for a hold reinspection after a failed inspection. However, it has disagreed with the tribunal’s conclusion on whether this implied term had been breached.

Court finds hold reinspection should have been arranged with reasonable diligence

News / Admiralty Court tackles crossing rule head on

24-02-2023 / Maritime

This is the first collision case since the Supreme Court decision in the Ever Smart, in which the Admiralty Court has applied the crossing rules. This article discusses the Court's decision, which is unusual because of the finding of 100% liability against one vessel.

Admiralty Court tackles crossing rule head on

News / Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships (MASS) – the work continues

24-02-2023 / Maritime

The international maritime industry is increasingly developing and relying on various levels of automation both onshore and on board. The IMO is leading the way forward and, among other things, has been taking a leading and proactive role in the introduction of commercially operated ships in autonomous mode.

Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships (MASS) – the work continues