Parties' Performance Brings Contract To Life

TTMI challenged the decision of an arbitrator to strike out its claim against Statoil ASA (Statoil) on the ground that there was no contract between the two parties and therefore no arbitration agreement. TTMI Sarl v Statoil ASA (2011)

The claim had been brought under a charterparty on the Shellvoy 5 form, clause 43(c) which provided for London arbitration; however no charterparty was drawn up, nor signed.

TTMI relied upon a fixture recap email, which mistakenly recorded Sempra Energy, TTMI's ultimate parent company, as the vessel's time-charterer.

TTMI's case was that, notwithstanding the mistake, there was a binding charterparty or alternatively that a contract was formed by performance and payment of freight. Statoil denied that there was a contract between it and TTMI as it believed that the contract was with Sempra Energy and that the charterparty was performed by them.