CBI Constructors Pty Ltd v Chevron Australia Pty Ltd [2024] HCA 28

CBI Constructors Pty Ltd v Chevron Australia Pty Ltd [2024] HCA 28
High Court of Australia
Gageler CJ, Gordon, Edelman, Steward, Gleeson, Jagot, & Beech-Jones JJ
Arbitration – a dispute concerning a contract for an offshore oil and gas project conducted by Chevron, known as the Gorgon Project, went to arbitration – the governing law of the contract was that of Western Australia – the arbitral tribunal made a second interim award in which it declared that CKJV was not prevented from advancing, maintaining or contending, whether in whole or in part, a claim that its entitlement to staff costs was to be calculated in a particular way by reason of res judicata, issue estoppel, or Anshun estoppel, and that the tribunal was not functus officio in respect of that case – Chevron applied to the WA Supreme Court, which held that the tribunal was functus officio in respect of that claim – the Court of Appeal dismissed CKJV’s appeal – CKJV was granted special leave to appeal to the High Court – held (by majority, Jagot & Beech-Jones JJ dissenting): CKJV and Chevron HAD agreed that the arbitral tribunal would use the UNCITRAL Rules in conducting the arbitration and those Rules directly addressed the making of an award by a tribunal – Art 34(2) of the Rules provides that all awards shall be final and binding, with the implication that multiple awards would not be made on the same issue – unless otherwise agreed by the parties, an arbitral tribunal has authority or jurisdiction to decide the dispute submitted to it by the parties finally and only once – when an award is rendered, the arbitral tribunal is not empowered to revisit the award that it has made – the First Interim Award had therefore been final and binding – the Court of Appeal had found that, by the First Interim Award, the arbitral tribunal had determined all issues of liability and that the relevant case CKJV sought to pursue in the Second Interim Award was a case on liability, and those findings were not challenged in the High Court – the arbitral tribunal had been functus officio in relation to this case – the arbitral tribunal’s findings concerning res judicata, issue estoppel, and Anshun estoppel did not preclude the Supreme Court considering Chevron’s application to set aside the Second Interim Award – the Supreme Court had correctly applied a de novo standard when reviewing the decision of the arbitral tribunal as to its jurisdiction – Jagot & Beech-Jones JJ would have allowed the appeal on the basis that the scope and effect of the First Interim Award only went to the “admissibility” o the case CKJV wished to pursue, and not the jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal to deal with it in the Second Interim Award – appeal dismissed.
CBI Constructors Pty Ltd