„RMD Grains S. A. L.“ v. „Fenix Comodities PC“

At a glance

Parties

RMD Grains S.A.L. (Lebanon) v. Fenix Comodities PC (United Kingdom)

Case no.

Civil case No. e2T-77-381/2019 (court proceeding No. 2-60-3-00067-2019-6)

Court

Lietuvos apeliacinis teismas (Court of Appeal of Lithuania), Civil Division, Vilnius

Underlying award(s)

FOSFA International award No. 4593 of 13 June 2019

Forum and rules

Recognition and enforcement under the 1958 New York Convention, Lithuanian Code of Civil Procedure (CPK) and Law on Commercial Arbitration (KAĮ)

Treaty

New York Convention 1958 (Article V)

Court

Judges Marius Bajoras, Artūras Driukas (presiding and rapporteur), Egidija Tamošiūnienė

Sector

Agricultural commodities; soybean sale

Outcome

The FOSFA award was recognised and declared enforceable in Lithuania (15 October 2019).

Amount

Award: EUR 2,336,889.59 plus 3% annual interest from 19 January 2018; USD 101,925.00 damages plus 4% annual interest from 26 January 2018; GBP 12,762.50 FOSFA costs and fees. Court costs: EUR 4,178.46 claimed, EUR 1,010.46 awarded to the applicant.

The dispute

RMD Grains S.A.L., a Lebanese company, contracted on 16 November 2017 to buy 7,000 metric tonnes of new-crop Ukrainian soybeans from Fenix Comodities PC, a UK company, FOBST Nikolaev or Yuzhny. On 18 January 2018 RMD Grains paid EUR 2,336,889.59 into an account at UAB "Paysera LT" in Vilnius. Fenix did not provide all the documents RMD Grains needed to take title to the goods, and did not return the money. The funds are now held in a deposit account of the Financial Crime Investigation Service under Lithuania's Ministry of the Interior. A FOSFA International tribunal ordered Fenix to repay the price and to pay damages and costs. RMD Grains then applied to the Court of Appeal of Lithuania to have the award recognised and enforced there, because funds formally belonging to Fenix were located in Lithuania. Fenix was served but filed no response.

Key holdings

1. Article V of the New York Convention lists the only grounds for refusing recognition. The court checks whether those grounds exist. It does not review the merits, the facts or the arbitrators' assessment of the evidence and the law. ¶ 7
2. Under Article V(1), the grounds apply only if the party resisting the award raises and proves them. Fenix filed no response, so the court did not examine Article V(1). It checked of its own motion only the Article V(2) grounds. ¶¶ 8–9
3. Arbitrability (Article V(2)(a)): a claim for return of money and damages arising from a contract between private companies can be arbitrated under Article 12 of the KAĮ. ¶ 10
4. Public policy (Article V(2)(b)) means international public policy and is read very narrowly. It covers fundamental principles of fair process, basic constitutional principles and moral norms, and awards obtained by coercion, fraud or threat. Nothing in this case showed that the award conflicted with public policy. ¶¶ 12–13
5. No ground for refusal under Article V(1) or V(2) was established. FOSFA award No. 4593 was recognised and declared enforceable in Lithuania. ¶ 14; operative part
6. Costs: the applicant claimed EUR 4,168 for legal services. The court reduced this to EUR 1,000 because the case was simple and the filings were short. It allowed EUR 10.46 for translations, so EUR 1,010.46 in total was awarded against Fenix. ¶¶ 15–17

Procedural history

1. 16 November 2017Contract signed for the sale of 7,000 metric tonnes of Ukrainian soybeans.
2. 18 January 2018RMD Grains pays EUR 2,336,889.59 into a Paysera LT account in Vilnius.
3. 13 June 2019FOSFA International award No. 4593 orders Fenix to repay the price and to pay damages and costs.
4. 19 September 2019Fenix is served with the application and the hearing notice; it files no response.
5. 15 October 2019The Court of Appeal of Lithuania recognises the award and declares it enforceable. Its ruling could be appealed in cassation to the Supreme Court of Lithuania within 30 days.

Tribunal, counsel and experts

Decided by

• Artūras Driukas Judge, Court of Appeal of Lithuania (presiding judge and rapporteur)
• Marius Bajoras Judge, Court of Appeal of Lithuania
• Egidija Tamošiūnienė Judge, Court of Appeal of Lithuania

Run a conflict check on these names →

Keywords

• New York Convention
• recognition and enforcement
• Article V(2)(a)
• Article V(2)(b)
• arbitrability
• public policy
• international public policy
• FOSFA
• soybeans
• commodities trade
• Lithuania
• Court of Appeal of Lithuania
• ex officio review
• no review of merits
• litigation costs reduction
• Paysera

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