Award - expiry of primary six-year time-limit - application to enforce award - acknowl-edgement of debt by telex sufficient for accrual of fresh cause of action

Good Challenger Navegante SA v Metalexportimport SA: CA (Lords Justice Mantel, Clarke and Mr Justice Rimer): 24 November 2003

On 25 January 1993, the shipowners obtained an ex parte order for enforcement of an arbitration award published in 1983 for the recovery of demurrage and damages from the charterers.

Without serving the order, the owners engaged in unsuccessful litigations in Romania, where the charterers were incorporated, for enforcement of the award.

Pursuant to leave granted on 16 January 2001, the owners served the award on the charterers on 15 August 2001.

The charterers applied to set aside the 1993 order on the ground that the cause of action on the award was outside the six-year limitation period, but the judge held that a telex sent by charterers' agent to the owners agent in February 1988 agreeing 'to talk and settle the outstanding balance' was the sufficient acknowledgment of the debt under section 30(1) of the Limitation Act 1980 to give a cause of action afresh, pursuant to section 29(5) of the Act.

The charterers appealed.

James Turner (instructed by Lane & Partners) for the charterers; Duncan Matthews QC and Michael Ashcroft (instructed by Holman, Fenwick & Willan) for the shipowners.

Held, dismissing the appeal, that where a typed signature of the charterers' agents appeared on the telex in circumstances in which it was evident that it had been put there on the agents' authority so that it could be seen that the agents were acknowledging the debt, it was sufficient to meet the purpose of section 30(1), which was to be sure that the person said to be acknowledging the debt had in truth done so; and that, accordingly, the typed name of the agents at the bottom of the telex was sufficient to give rise to a fresh cause of action on the award.