Ridgebury November LLC and others (Respondents) v King Crude Carriers SA and others (Appellants)

Hearing listed

Case summary
Appeal

Case summary

Case ID

UKSC/2024/0106

Parties

Appellant(s)

(1) King Crude Carriers SA

(2) Prince Crude Carriers SA

(3) Zenon Crude Carriers SA

Respondent(s)

(1) Ridgebury November LLC

(2) Ridgebury Sierra LLC

(3) Makronissos Special Maritime Enterprise

Issue

Following the Appellants’ breach of contract, was the Respondents’ proper remedy in damages or in debt?

Facts

The dispute arises out of three contracts for the sale of oil tankers concluded on an amended 2012 Norwegian Saleform contract on 28, 29 and 30 April 2020 (the “MOAs”). The material terms of the contracts are identical. The appellants are referred to as “the Buyers” and the respondents, “the Sellers”. Pursuant to clause 2 of the MOAs, as security for the correct fulfilment of the agreement, the Buyers were required to lodge a deposit (10% of the purchase price) with a firm of solicitors, Holman Fenwick & Willan Greece (“HFW”) within 3 banking days of HFW confirming in writing that the deposit holding accounts were open and ready to receive funds. The parties were obligated to provide all necessary documentation to allow HFW to open and maintain the deposit accounts without delay. The Buyers failed to provide the necessary documents to HFW, in breach of their obligations under clause 2 of the MOAs. Consequently, the deposits were not paid. The Sellers gave notice to terminate the MOAs on 22 and 30 May 2022. The Sellers commenced arbitration seeking to recover the amount of the deposits totalling US$4.94 million. The arbitrators held that the Sellers were entitled to recover the amount of the deposits in debt. The Buyers were granted leave to appeal under s.69 Arbitration Act 1996. The High Court allowed the Buyers appeal and granted the Sellers leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal allowed the Sellers appeal. The Buyers now appeal to the Supreme Court.