UAB „Samčio burtai“ v. UAB „Alsana“

At a glance

Parties

UAB „Samčio burtai“ (applicant, assignee of Kazproperty OU) v. UAB „Alsana“ (interested party)

Case no.

Court of Appeal of Lithuania, Civil Case No. e2T-28-381/2020 (court process No. 2-60-3-00014-2020-0)

Court

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

Underlying award(s)

Riga Permanent Court of Arbitration, award of 18 June 2018, Case No. 2018/5

Treaty

1958 New York Convention (Articles III, IV, V)

Judges

Artūras Driukas (presiding and rapporteur), Dalia Kačinskienė, Danguolė Martinavičienė

Sector

Copper trade (sale of goods)

Outcome

The award was recognised and declared enforceable in Lithuania (2 April 2020). The claim for litigation costs was not decided because no supporting documents were filed.

Amount

The award granted EUR 142,500 debt, EUR 98,325 contractual penalties and EUR 6,143 arbitration costs.

The dispute

Kazproperty OU sold copper to UAB „Alsana“ under Goods (Copper) Sale Contract No. 75/2017. Clause 13 of the contract referred disputes to the Riga Permanent Court of Arbitration. In an award of 18 June 2018 (Case No. 2018/5), that court ordered Alsana to pay Kazproperty OU EUR 142,500 in debt, EUR 98,325 in penalties and EUR 6,143 in arbitration costs. On 1 August 2018, by Assignment Agreement No. 01/18, Kazproperty OU assigned all its rights under the award to UAB „Samčio burtai“. Samčio burtai then asked the Court of Appeal of Lithuania to recognise and enforce the award, arguing that none of the refusal grounds in Article V(1) and V(2) of the New York Convention applied. Alsana could not be served at its registered address, did not take part in the proceedings and raised no defences.

Key holdings

1. Service on Alsana was treated as proper. Two registered mailings to its registered office could not be delivered. Under Article 2.49(3) of the Civil Code and Article 123(4) of the Code of Civil Procedure, the documents were deemed served ten days after dispatch. ¶ 4
2. Article V of the New York Convention lists the grounds for refusal exhaustively. A recognition court may not review the merits of the award, the arbitrators' findings of fact or their application of the law. ¶ 6
3. The applicant met Article IV(1). It filed certified copies of the award and of the sale contract containing the arbitration clause, with certified Lithuanian translations. It also filed the assignment agreement and evidence that the arbitral tribunal had sent correspondence to Alsana. ¶ 10
4. The party resisting enforcement bears the burden of proving the Article V(1) grounds. Alsana invoked none, so the Court did not examine them. ¶ 11
5. The Court examined the Article V(2) grounds on its own motion. Under Lithuanian law, a dispute over improper performance of a sale contract and resulting damages can be arbitrated, and recognising the award does not violate Lithuanian public policy. ¶ 12
6. The award was recognised and declared enforceable in Lithuania. The applicant's request for litigation costs was left undecided because it filed no evidence of the costs or their amount. ¶¶ 13–14; operative part

Procedural history

1. 18 June 2018The Riga Permanent Court of Arbitration issues its award in Case No. 2018/5 in favour of Kazproperty OU against UAB „Alsana“.
2. 1 August 2018Kazproperty OU assigns its rights under the award to UAB „Samčio burtai“ by Assignment Agreement No. 01/18.
3. 6 March 2020A second attempt to serve the procedural documents on Alsana by registered mail fails.
4. 2 April 2020The Court of Appeal of Lithuania recognises the award and declares it enforceable. The ruling took effect on adoption and could be appealed in cassation to the Supreme Court within 30 days.

Tribunal, counsel and experts

Decided by

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

Run a conflict check on these names →

Keywords

• New York Convention
• recognition and enforcement
• foreign arbitral award
• Riga Permanent Court of Arbitration
• Lithuania
• Latvia
• assignment of award
• Kazproperty
• copper sale contract
• public policy
• arbitrability
• Article V(2)
• burden of proof
• service of process
• no review of merits
• Article IV documents

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