Cbi Constructors Pty Ltd v Chevron Australia Pty Ltd

The appeal concerned the setting aside of an arbitral award by a primary judge of the Supreme Court of Western Australia. The appeal was dismissed. The appeal was against a decision by Kenneth Martin J, who set aside an arbitral award made in favour of CKJV, the appellant, against Chevron, the respondent. The arbitration proceedings concerned a contractual dispute involving a claim by CKJV in respect of its alleged entitlement to the reimbursement of costs of 'Staff' and other services provided to Chevron in relation to Chevron's offshore oil and gas project known as the Gorgon project. The arbitral award was set aside on the basis that the arbitral tribunal was functus officio. The Court of Appeal held that the learned primary judge was correct in his finding that the arbitral tribunal was functus officio. The arbitral tribunal was functus officio in respect of CKJV's Contract Criteria Case, in the sense that the arbitral tribunal had no jurisdiction or authority to determine that case. The Court of Appeal held that the Court could review the Tribunal's finding that it was functus officio. The Court of Appeal held that the primary judge was correct to find that the Tribunal was functus officio in respect of the Contract Criteria Case. The Court of Appeal held that the primary judge was correct to conclude that the Contract Criteria Case was essentially a liability issue. The Court of Appeal held that the primary judge was correct to find that the Contract Criteria Case was a new point pleaded after the issue of the First Interim Award. The Court of Appeal held that the primary judge was correct to conclude that CKJV's Contract Criteria Case fell within the expression 'all issues of liability' within the meaning of earlier procedural orders. The Court of Appeal held that the primary judge was correct to set aside the Second Interim Award on the basis that the Tribunal was relevantly functus officio. The Court of Appeal held that the primary judge was correct to conclude that the Tribunal was functus officio, and that the award should be set aside. The Court of Appeal held that the primary judge was correct to find that the Tribunal was functus officio in respect of the Contract Criteria Case. The Court of Appeal held that the primary judge was correct to conclude that CKJV's Contract Criteria Case was essentially a liability issue. The Court of Appeal held that the primary judge was correct to find that the Contract Criteria Case was a new point pleaded after the issue of the First Interim Award. The Court of Appeal held that the primary judge was correct to conclude that CKJV's Contract Criteria Case fell within the expression 'all issues of liability' within the meaning of earlier procedural orders. The Court of Appeal held that the primary judge was correct to set aside the Second Interim Award on the basis that the Tribunal was relevantly functus officio. The Court of Appeal held that the primary judge was correct to conclude that the Tribunal was functus officio, and that the award should be set aside. The Court of Appeal held that the primary judge was correct to find that the Tribunal was functus officio in respect of the Contract Criteria Case. The Court of Appeal held that the primary judge was correct to conclude that CKJV's Contract Criteria Case was essentially a liability issue. The Court of Appeal held that the primary judge was correct to find that the Contract Criteria Case was a new point pleaded after the issue of the First Interim Award. The Court of Appeal held that the primary judge was correct to conclude that CKJV's Contract Criteria Case fell within the expression 'all issues of liability' within the meaning of earlier procedural orders. The Court of Appeal held that the primary judge was correct to set aside the Second Interim Award on the basis that the Tribunal was relevantly functus officio. The Court of Appeal held that the primary judge was correct to conclude that the Tribunal was functus officio, and that the award should be set aside.