Landmark Cases

Zaiwalla & Co represented Sharp Corp Limited, India in a dispute with Viterra BV, Netherlands regarding the correct calculation of damages under a GAFTA contract for the sale of Canadian Yellow Peas and Crimson Lentils. After Sharp defaulted on payment terms, Viterra declared a default and prevailed in two GAFTA arbitrations, securing an award of approximately US$6 million.

Zaiwalla team challenged these awards, arguing that damages should reflect the value of custom cleared goods left in seller’s hand in India rather than replicating the terms of the original sale contract.

In a landmark judgment, the UK Supreme Court upheld Sharp’s appeal, setting a precedent on how to assess damages in international sales contracts and dismissed the damages assessment adopted by two GAFTA arbitration tribunals, the UK High Court and with some variation, the UK Court of Appeal.

Zaiwalla & Co obtains a confidential LCIA arbitration award in favour of its client for US$200 million in a dispute over family assets held through a Cypriot company following their client’s divorce.

A determination of the High Court’s jurisdiction to hear a £25m dispute between a Mongolian-Russian mining company and the Kazakhstan government. The Court gave authoritative guidance on the rules by which it will hear and decide cases with international aspects.

Since the early 1980s Zaiwalla & Co has handled over 1000 arbitrations arising out of vessel charters to transport foodstuffs to India during the food shortage between 1982-94. The firm’s tenacious defence of these claims saved the Indian Government over US$80 million at a time when foreign capital reserves were scarce.

The High Court decided that even though the parties had agreed to arbitrate any disputes in London, Indian law should apply to the arbitration procedure. This result was very beneficial to overseas parties fighting cases in London arbitrations.

Zaiwalla & Co won its argument that an arbitration clause was valid. The Court decided that an agreement which stated that “the parties could decide to submit any dispute between them to an arbiter of their choice in London” was a valid arbitration agreement. This is now a significant authority for the regular disputes between parties about whether they have even agreed to arbitrate.

In the context of a major commodity dispute, Zaiwalla & Co overturned a GAFTA arbitration decision in the High Court. The Court accepted Zaiwalla & Co’s argument that a contract was not binding on an Indian Government public entity where it was signed by an employee who did not have actual or apparent authority to bind the company, regardless of the other parties’ belief that he did.

A well-publicised application where a claimant sought to commit a company’s directors to prison, on the basis that they had failed to comply with certain provisions of a worldwide freezing order. The Court held that if a company fails to comply with the terms of a freezing order, its directors could be fined or imprisoned, but only if they had ‘wilfully’ failed to comply.

We acted for one of Moscow’s leading lawyers in defence to a $300 million claim by Russian oligarch Sergei Polonskiy following the sale of a stake in his company to another shareholder, which he claimed was going to be sold to oligarch Roman Abramovich. We successfully had the claim dismissed and a judgment was granted on our client’s counterclaim.