Hameon Pty Ltd v Makris Enterprises Pty Ltd

In the Supreme Court of South Australia, Hameon Pty Ltd (the applicant) sought to enforce an arbitral award against Makris Enterprises Pty Ltd (the respondent). The dispute arose from a contract for the sale of land, where the applicant alleged the respondent had breached the agreement. Following arbitration, an award was made in favour of the applicant. The applicant then commenced proceedings in the Supreme Court to have this award recognised and enforced.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the arbitral award was enforceable under the *International Arbitration Act 1974* (Cth) (the Act), which gives effect to the New York Convention. Specifically, the Court had to consider the grounds upon which enforcement of a foreign arbitral award could be refused, as set out in Article V of the Convention, which is incorporated into the Act. The respondent contended that enforcement should be refused on several grounds, including that it was not given proper notice of the appointment of the arbitrator or of the arbitration proceedings, and that the award dealt with a dispute not contemplated by or not falling within the terms of the submission to arbitration.

Justice Thompson considered the evidence presented by both parties regarding the arbitration process. The Court found that the respondent had participated in the arbitration proceedings and had not raised objections concerning notice or the scope of the arbitration at that time. Applying the principles of waiver and estoppel, the Court determined that the respondent had implicitly accepted the jurisdiction of the arbitrator and the scope of the arbitration. Furthermore, the Court was satisfied that the respondent had been given due notice and an opportunity to present its case. The Court concluded that none of the grounds for refusing enforcement under Article V of the Convention were established.

Consequently, the Supreme Court ordered that the arbitral award be recognised and enforced.