In this edition Oliver Caplin explains the decision of the Court of Appeal Sarpd Oil International Limited v Addax Energy SA & Another  EWCA 120. Oliver acted for the successful appellant in this key decision clarifying two important points of principle relating to the Court’s power to grant security for costs, and providing guidance on how the post-Jackson Reforms costs budgeting provisions operate in practice.
Belinda McRae looks at another recent case involving members from 20 Essex Street, namely the Magellan Spirit ApS v Vitol SA  EWHC 454 (Comm). This case concerned an application for an anti-suit injunction, in which the central issue was whether there was an agreement conferring jurisdiction on the English High Court.
Matthew McGhee considers the Court of Appeal’s decision in Yemgas CO & Others v Superior Pescadores SA Panama (The Superior Pescadores)  EWCA Civ 101, which considered the construction of a common Paramount Clause (materially identical to that in the Congenbill form), holding that it incorporates the Hague-Visby, and not the Hague, Rules.
Finally, Thomas Corby summarises the decision in Glory Wealth Shipping Pte Ltd v Flame SA  EWHC 293 (Comm). This was the second of two appeals from the same arbitration and concerned the question of whether an owner suffers a loss if, prior to a charterer’s breach of a contract of affreightment, it has directed all freight to be paid to a third party and has no right to insist on its return.