Emerald Grain Australia Pty Ltd v Agrocorp International Pte Ltd [2014] FCA 414

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Emerald Grain Australia Pty Ltd v Agrocorp International Pte Ltd [2014] FCA 414 Citation: Emerald Grain Australia Pty Ltd v Agrocorp International Pte Ltd [2014] FCA 414

Parties: EMERALD GRAIN AUSTRALIA PTY LTD (ABN: 82 109 203 054) v AGROCORP INTERNATIONAL PTE LTD

File number: VID 1202 of 2013

Judge: PAGONE J

Date of judgment: 30 April 2014

Catchwords: ARBITRATION – application to set aside arbitral award – whether award in conflict with or contrary to public policy of Australia – whether award breached rules of natural justice – whether no probative evidence before tribunal to support findings – applicant required to show that findings made in absence of evidence or on evidence incapable of supporting findings – whether tribunal made findings based on own opinions and ideas without allowing parties opportunity to be heard – applicant required to show that findings would not have been foreseen by a reasonable litigant or that litigant might have been able to persuade tribunal otherwise if given adequate notice – where tribunal made determination on the papers – International Arbitration Act 1974 (Cth) discloses policy of upholding arbitral awards unless in conflict with public policy – content of rules of natural justice depends on context in which rules to be applied – reasons for decision of tribunal not to be construed as if decision of a court – findings in award to be read consistently with one another to give effect to policy of upholding arbitral awards – error in factual finding not sufficient to ground submission that finding made in absence of probative evidence – correctness of factual findings of tribunal not amenable to review where findings were open on the evidence. PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application to set aside arbitral award – application by way of originating application and supporting affidavit – where no statement of claim, supporting affidavit required to set out material facts supporting application – supporting affidavit set out a number of specific grounds "among other things" – whether supporting affidavit sufficiently identified grounds relied upon and alleged errors in award – whether case presented at hearing consistent with grounds for application set out in supporting affidavit – whether written submissions exceeded grounds set out in supporting affidavit – words 'if court finds' in Article 34 of Model Law do not oblige Court to inquire into matters not sufficiently raised by parties – submissions disregarded to the extent that they exceeded grounds set out in supporting affidavit.