L v R

John Russell (instructed by Andrew Jackson) for the Claimant Julian Kenny (instructed by Waterson Hicks) for the Defendant Hearing dates: 11 October 2012 ____________________

(1) The Tribunal's Award was a money award, and not a declaratory award, which is what the parties had agreed or at least reasonably expected. As a result, L says, it has lost the value of a set-off which it was entitled to make against its liability for demurrage � a set-off founded on the R's alleged unlawful conduct in relation to the arrest of the MV ORMOS in February 2005 ("the Ormos Claim").

(2) In its Award, the Tribunal wrongly purported to prohibit L from advancing its alleged set-offs, which included the Ormos Claim. Hence again, L has lost the value of that claim as a set-off.

(3) As to (1), R applied for a money award and the parties never agreed, nor could reasonably have expected, that the Tribunal would make a declaratory award only. In any event, L has not shown that it has suffered any substantial injustice: there is no evidence that the Ormos Claim had any chance of success.

(4) As to (2), R accepts that this was an irregularity. The Tribunal had no power to prohibit L from relying on the Ormos Claim as a set-off in proceedings following the Award. However the order created no injustice because there were no claims against which the Ormos Claim could have been set-off in proceedings following the Award. Alternatively, there is no substantial injustice because L has not produced evidence to show that the Ormos Claim had any chance of success.