SIA „Rigas kombinetas lopbaribas rupnica“ v. UAB „Gytsta“

At a glance

Parties

SIA „Rigas kombinetas lopbaribas rupnica“ (applicant) v. UAB „Gytsta“ (interested party)

Case no.

Civil case No. e2T-88-943/2019 (court process No. 2-60-3-00079-2019-9)

Court

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

Underlying award(s)

Award of the Riga International Commercial Arbitration Court of 21 September 2018, case No. 3-17/1

Forum and rules

Recognition and enforcement under the 1958 New York Convention and the Lithuanian Law on Commercial Arbitration

Treaty

New York Convention, Article V

Court

Judges Rasa Gudžiūnienė, Dalia Kačinskienė and Egidija Tamošiūnienė (presiding and rapporteur)

Sector

Animal feed supply

Outcome

Award recognised and enforcement permitted in Lithuania (26 November 2019).

Amount

Award enforced: EUR 18,756.20 debt, EUR 8,182.22 interest and EUR 2,100 arbitration costs.

The dispute

The Latvian company SIA „Rigas kombinetas lopbaribas rupnica“ and the Lithuanian company UAB „Gytsta“ concluded Feed Supply Contract No. 107/21 on 25 November 2016. Clause 10 of the contract referred disputes to the Riga International Commercial Arbitration Court. A dispute arose over performance of the contract. On 21 September 2018 that arbitral court ordered Gytsta to pay EUR 18,756.20 in debt, EUR 8,182.22 in interest and EUR 2,100 in arbitration costs by 21 October 2018. The award creditor then applied to the Court of Appeal of Lithuania to recognise the award and permit its enforcement. Gytsta was deemed served under the Code of Civil Procedure but filed no response and raised no defences.

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, the evidence or how the arbitrators applied the law. ¶¶ 7–8
2. The party resisting the award must prove the grounds in Article V(1). The court must examine the Article V(2) grounds of its own motion, on both procedure and substance. ¶ 9
3. The applicant met the formal requirements of Article 51(2) of the Law on Commercial Arbitration. It filed certified copies of the award and of the contract containing the arbitration agreement, each with a Lithuanian translation. ¶ 10
4. A claim for a debt under a sale-of-goods contract between private parties is arbitrable under Lithuanian law (Article V(2)(a)). ¶ 11
5. Gytsta knew of the arbitration. A bailiff served it with the notice of arbitration and the statement of claim on 6 December 2017. Gytsta raised no Article V(1) grounds, the court found no Article V(1) or V(2) grounds, and it recognised the award and permitted its enforcement. ¶¶ 12–13

Procedural history

1. 25 November 2016The parties concluded Feed Supply Contract No. 107/21, whose clause 10 provided for arbitration in Riga.
2. 6 December 2017A bailiff served Gytsta with the notice of arbitration and the statement of claim.
3. 21 September 2018The Riga International Commercial Arbitration Court issued its award in case No. 3-17/1 in favour of the applicant.
4. 23 September 2019The Court of Appeal accepted the application for recognition and set a deadline for Gytsta's response.
5. 28 October 2019After Gytsta failed to collect the court's mail, the court set a new deadline of 20 November 2019. Gytsta was deemed served on 11 November 2019.
6. 26 November 2019The Court of Appeal recognised the award and permitted its enforcement in Lithuania. The ruling took effect the same day and could be appealed in cassation to the Supreme Court within 30 days.

Tribunal, counsel and experts

Decided by

• Egidija Tamošiūnienė Judge, Lietuvos apeliacinis teismas (presiding judge and rapporteur)
• Rasa Gudžiūnienė Judge, Lietuvos apeliacinis teismas
• Dalia Kačinskienė Judge, Lietuvos apeliacinis teismas

Run a conflict check on these names →

Keywords

• New York Convention
• Article V
• recognition and enforcement
• foreign arbitral award
• Riga International Commercial Arbitration Court
• Lithuania
• Latvia
• arbitrability
• ex officio review
• no review of merits
• Law on Commercial Arbitration Article 51
• animal feed supply
• debt recovery
• burden of proof
• default of respondent

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