![China / 25 June 2007 / China, 中华人民共和国最高人民法院 (Supreme People’s Court) / Bunge Agribusiness Singapore Pte. Ltd. v. Guangdong Fengyuan Food & Oil Group Company Ltd. / [2006] Min Si Ta Zi No. 41 (2006民四他字第41号)](./images/case-law.png)
China / 25 June 2007 / China, 中华人民共和国最高人民法院 (Supreme People’s Court) / Bunge Agribusiness Singapore Pte. Ltd. v. Guangdong Fengyuan Food & Oil Group Company Ltd. / [2006] Min Si Ta Zi No. 41 (2006民四他字第41号)
| Country | China |
| Court | China, 中华人民共和国最高人民法院 (Supreme People’s Court) |
| Date | 25 June 2007 |
| Parties | Bunge Agribusiness Singapore Pte. Ltd. v. Guangdong Fengyuan Food & Oil Group Company Ltd. |
| Case number | [2006] Min Si Ta Zi No. 41 (2006民四他字第41号) |
| Applicable NYC Provisions | V | V(1)(e) | V(1)(d) |
| Source |
Guide on Foreign-related Commercial and Maritime Trial, pp. 24-30 (People's Court Press, Vol. 2, 2007). |
| Languages | English |
| Summary | On 4 March 2004, Bunge Agribusiness Singapore Pte. Ltd. and Guangdong Fengyuan Food & Oil Group Company Ltd. entered into an agreement for the sale of soybeans in which any dispute arising from the agreement would be settled by arbitration in London under the auspices of the Federation of Oils, Seeds and Fats Associations (FOSFA). The parties had also agreed that English law would apply to the arbitration agreement and the arbitration procedure. A dispute arose between the parties when Guangdong Fengyuan Food & Oil Group Company Ltd. failed to open a letter of credit in accordance with the agreement. On 10 August 2004, Bunge Agribusiness Singapore Pte. Ltd. filed for an arbitration with FOSFA. An arbitral award was rendered in favour of Bunge Agribusiness Singapore Pte. Ltd. on 19 July 2005, who then applied for recognition and enforcement of the award with the Yangjiang Intermediate People’s Court. The Yangjiang Intermediate People’s Court opined that the award should not be recognised or enforced. In particular, the court opined pursuant to Article V(1)(e) NYC that the award had not yet become binding on the parties since there was no evidence to show that Guangdong Fengyuan Food & Oil Group Company Ltd. had received the award in compliance with the Chinese Civil Procedure Law. The Yangjiang Intermediate People’s Court reported its opinion to the Guangzhou Higher People's Court for review. The Guangzhou Higher People's Court confirmed that the award should not be recognised or enforced. In particular, the court opined that the award had not yet become binding upon the parties under Article V(1)(e) NYC. The Guangzhou Higher People's Court reported its opinion to the Supreme People’s Court (最高人民法院) for review in accordance with the Notice of the Supreme People's Court on the Adjudication of the Relevant Issues About Foreign-related Arbitration and Foreign Arbitral Matters by the People's Court. The Supreme People's Court confirmed that the award should be not be recognised or enforced. In particular, the court opined, pursuant to Article V(1)(d) NYC, that the tribunal had failed to comply with the arbitration rules agreed by the parties since it had failed to provide notification to Guangdong Fengyuan Food & Oil Group Company Ltd. in compliance with the FOSFA rules when it appointed a new arbitrator to replace the one originally appointed for Guangdong Fengyuan Food & Oil Group Company Ltd. in the proceeding. |
Attachment (2)
 Original Language Adobe Acrobat PDF |
Unofficial Translation Adobe Acrobat PDF |
