CLOUT
  index.

Published in French: Requeils de Jurisprudence du Québec 1987, 1346

The court ruled that arbitrators cannot be criticized for expressing themselves as commercial men and not as lawyers. Where the agreement between the parties does not specify the form of the award, that form is governed by article 31(2).

In accordance with the arbitration clause contained in a charter-party agreement concluded on 9 January 1981, the parties submitted to arbitration a dispute concerning their respective liability with regard to certain damages that resulted from the grounding, on 26 April 1984, of the vessel that was the subject of the charter-party. The applicant (Navigation Sonomar), based on alleged lack of coherent and comprehensible reasons, submitted an application to set aside the award rendered on 29 October 1986.

The Superior Court dismissed the application. The court ruled that the reasons were adequate, taking into account not only what was expressly stated but also what was implicit in the award. Arbitrators cannot be criticized for expressing themselves as commercial men and not as lawyers.

The reference to the Requeils de Jurisprudence du Québec was corrected (as now shown above).

Commented on by Tetley in [1993] Lloyd's Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly, 238.

Additional Information published in later CLOUT issue (on "9 February 2000"):

Abstract published in English: [1995] Model Arbitration Law Quarterly Reports, Vol. 1, issue 1, 1

Text of the court decision published in English: [1995] Model Arbitration Law Quarterly Reports, Vol. 1, issue 1, 6

Text of the court decision published in French: [1995] Model Arbitration Law Quarterly Reports, Vol. 1, issue 1, 24

Reproduced on this web site (www.interarb.com) with the kind permission of the United Nations, New York.
Database, typography, layout, etc. © interarb, 1999.