WESTERN CANADA STEAM. CO. v. Cia. De Nav. San Leonardo
| Decision Date | 29 May 1952 |
| Parties | WESTERN CANADA STEAMSHIP CO., Ltd. v. CIA. DE NAV. SAN LEONARDO. ANGLO CANADIAN SHIPPING CO., Ltd. v. SAN MARTINE COMPANIA DE NAVEGACION, S. A. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York |
Burlingham, Veeder, Clark & Hupper, New York City, for Western Canada Steamship Co., Ltd. et al.
Ruth M. McElveney, New York City, for Cia. De Nav. San Leonardo et al.
When disputes arose out of these charter parties, the owners in each instance appointed one Ole Skaarup as its arbitrator under Clause 17 and the charterers similarly appointed one T. E. Bradley.
In September, 1951, Skaarup and Bradley met to appoint a third arbitrator, but finding no substantial dispute as to the merits of the controversies, the two decided to reduce the expense of the arbitration by omitting to appoint and consult with a third arbitrator. They discussed the merits of the controversies on this and another occasion and on December 12, 1951, Skaarup and Bradley awarded $5,536.28 to Cia. De Nav. San Leonardo, and agreed that the arbitrators' fees be paid by Western Canada Steamship Company, Ltd. On the same day they awarded San Martine Compania De Navegacion, S.A., $3,397.18, and it was agreed that Anglo Canadian Shipping Company, Ltd., should pay the arbitrators' fees.
Bradley, in his affidavit, verified March 7, 1952, states that he never informed the charterers that a third arbitrator would not be appointed, although Skaarup did so advise the shipowners. Bradley's explanation for so acting is his claim that he believed this arbitration was under a clause requiring a third arbitrator only if the two appointed failed to agree. Skaarup, by affidavit verified April 4, 1952, states that Bradley knew the true text of the clause but misconstrued its legal effect, believing that a custom in New York requires a third arbitrator under this clause only when the two already appointed disagree.
On these facts, the owners move for the confirmation of the awards, motion no. 60 urging that Bradley's misinterpretation of the legal effect of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Amerada Hess Corp. v. LOCAL 22026 FED. LAB. U., AFL-CIO
...him,2 Orion Shipping and Trading Co. v. Eastern States Petroleum Corp., 312 F.2d 299 (2d Cir. 1963); Western Canada S.S. Co. v. Cia De Nav. San Leonardo, 105 F.Supp. 452 (S.D.N.Y.1952); or that the arbitrator had no power to grant a particular remedy. See, Structural Steel & Ornamental Iron......
-
Globe Transport & Trading (UK) v. Guthrie Latex
...the third arbitrator's job was not in jeopardy as was the arbitrator's in Pitta. Furthermore, Western Canada Steamship Co. v. Cia. de Nav. San Leonardo, 105 F.Supp. 452, 453 (S.D.N.Y.1952), the case relied upon by Globe in large part, can also be differentiated from the instant case. There,......
-
INTERN. LONGSHOREMEN'S ASS'N v. WEST GULF MARITIME
...contracting for arbitration must be content with its informalities," see Western Canada Steamship Co. Ltd. v. Cia De Nav. San Leonardo Anglo Canadian Shipping Co., Ltd., 105 F.Supp. 452, 453 (S.D.N.Y.1952), the procedures followed cannot be so informal or chaotic that a court called upon to......
-
Western Employers Ins. Co. v. Jefferies & Co., Inc., 90-56063
...10(d) when they fail to meet their obligations, as specified in a given contract, to the parties. See Western Canada S.S. Co. v. Cia. De Nav. San Leonardo, 105 F.Supp. 452 (S.D.N.Y.1952) (vacating award where two arbitrators making award failed to appoint a third arbitrator as specified in ......