Ribotos atsakomybės bendrovė “Biuro Eksporta” v. UAB “Kilimalis”

At a glance

Parties

Ribotos atsakomybės bendrovė "Biuro Eksporta" (applicant, address in Grodno) v. UAB "Kilimalis" (interested party, Vilnius)

Case no.

Lietuvos apeliacinis teismas (Court of Appeal of Lithuania), No. 2T-98-370/2018

Court

Court of Appeal of Lithuania, Civil Division: Artūras Driukas, Danguolė Martinavičienė (presiding judge and rapporteur), Egidijus Žironas

Underlying award(s)

Award of the International Arbitration Court at the Belarusian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, dated 24 April 2018 in the reasoning (the operative part refers to an award of 2 November 2012)

Treaty

New York Convention 1958 (Articles II, III, IV, V(2)); Lithuanian Law on Commercial Arbitration, Article 51

Sector

Freight forwarding

Outcome

Request partly granted: the award was recognised and declared enforceable in Lithuania. The request to have recovered sums paid into the applicant's bank account was rejected.

Amount

Award enforced: EUR 3,300 debt, EUR 5,104 late-payment penalties and EUR 1,401.53 arbitration fee. Costs: EUR 125 for translation.

The dispute

Biuro Eksporta and UAB "Kilimalis" signed a freight forwarding contract on 13 October 2015. Clause 5.3 sent disputes involving a non-resident of Belarus to the International Arbitration Court at the Belarusian Chamber of Commerce and Industry. That court made an award against Kilimalis for a debt, late-payment penalties and the arbitration fee. Biuro Eksporta asked the Court of Appeal of Lithuania to recognise the award and allow its enforcement in Lithuania. It also asked for its costs and for recovered sums to be paid into its bank account. Kilimalis filed no response, although the court gave it two deadlines.

Key holdings

1. Belarus is a party to the New York Convention. Recognition of the award is therefore governed by Article V of the Convention and Article 51 of the Lithuanian Law on Commercial Arbitration. ¶ 6
2. The applicant met the requirements of Article IV of the Convention and Article 51(2) of the Law. It filed certified copies of the award and of the contract, with Lithuanian translations. Clause 5.3 of the contract is a written arbitration agreement within Article II. ¶¶ 7–10
3. The court examines the Article V(2) grounds (arbitrability and public policy) on its own motion. Disputes under carriage or freight forwarding contracts are not reserved to the courts and can be arbitrated (Article 12 of the Law). Nothing showed that recognising the award would breach public policy. ¶¶ 11–13
4. The award was recognised and declared enforceable. Kilimalis owes EUR 3,300 in debt, EUR 5,104 in late-payment penalties and EUR 1,401.53 in arbitration fees. It must also pay EUR 125 for translation costs. ¶ 13; operative part
5. The request to pay recovered sums into the applicant's account was rejected. Under Article III of the Convention, enforcement follows Lithuanian procedure: the court issues a writ of execution, and the creditor must take it to a bailiff. ¶ 14

Procedural history

1. 13 October 2015The parties sign the freight forwarding contract with an arbitration clause (clause 5.3).
2. 24 April 2018Award of the International Arbitration Court at the Belarusian Chamber of Commerce and Industry. This is the date given in the reasoning; the operative part refers to 2 November 2012.
3. 1 October 2018The Court of Appeal accepts the request for recognition and sets a deadline for a response.
4. 30 October 2018Kilimalis has not responded. The court sets a new deadline of 28 November 2018.
5. 4 December 2018Judgment: the award is recognised and declared enforceable; the rest of the request is rejected. A cassation appeal to the Supreme Court of Lithuania was possible within 30 days.

Tribunal, counsel and experts

Decided by

• Danguolė Martinavičienė Judge, Court of Appeal of Lithuania (presiding judge and rapporteur)
• Artūras Driukas Judge, Court of Appeal of Lithuania
• Egidijus Žironas Judge, Court of Appeal of Lithuania

Run a conflict check on these names →

Keywords

• recognition and enforcement
• New York Convention
• Article V(2)
• public policy
• arbitrability
• Article IV formal requirements
• written arbitration agreement
• Belarusian Chamber of Commerce and Industry
• Lithuania
• Belarus
• freight forwarding
• Law on Commercial Arbitration Article 51
• writ of execution
• default of respondent

Summary generated with AI from the published documents — refer to the award for the authoritative text.