We have previously reported here and here on the long-running dispute between West Tankers and the insurers, Allianz and Generali. The latest development is the English Commercial Court decision, West Tankers Inc v. (1) Allianz SpA and (2) Generali Assicurazione Generali SpA [2011] EWHC 829 (Comm). For full details of the facts leading up to this decision, please go to our previous blogs.

West Tankers had been granted an arbitral award declaring that it had no liability to the insurers. It then successfully applied to the Commercial Court to have the arbitral decision entered into as a judgment under the Arbitration Act 1996 (the Act). It did so in order to prevent Generali from obtaining and enforcing an inconsistent judgment from the Italian courts. On appealing this decision, Generali argued that s.66(1) of the Act allows a court to grant leave to enforce an arbitral award only if it is capable of being enforced by execution using one of the available means, for example a third party debt order, and as the arbitral award to be entered into was a mere declaration of the parties rights, it was not capable of enforcement.

Dismissing the appeal, Mr Justice Field stated that where the objective is to establish the primacy of a declaratory award over an inconsistent judgment in rival proceedings, the court has jurisdiction to make an order to enable the party to enter an arbitral award into judgment under s.66 of the Act.

This finding highlights the English court’s willingness to support an English arbitral award to prevent the recognition of conflicting foreign judgments.

A copy of the decision can be found here.