Baker Marine (Nig.) Ltd. v. Chevron (Nig.) Ltd.
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
191 F.3d 194 (1999)

- Written by Catherine Cotovsky, JD
Facts
Baker Marine (Nig.) Ltd. (Baker Marine) (plaintiff) filed an action against Chevron (Nig.) Ltd. (Chevron) and Danos and Curole Marine Contractors, Inc. (Danos) (defendants) in federal district court to enforce arbitral awards granted to Baker Marine by Nigerian arbitration panels. Baker Marine, Danos, and Chevron had contracted in Nigeria for the provision of barge services to support Chevron’s Nigerian oil operations. The contract included clauses that designated Nigerian law to govern interpretation of the terms of the contract and also that any contract-related disputes would be resolved by arbitration proceedings governed by the substantive laws of Nigeria. Additionally, arbitral awards pursuant to the contract would be governed by the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (the convention), of which both Nigeria and the United States were signatories. A breach-of-contract dispute arose between Baker Marine and Chevron and Danos, which was duly submitted for arbitration by arbitration panels in Lagos, Nigeria. The arbitration panels decided in favor of Baker Marine against both Chevron and Danos. Baker Marine filed actions in Nigerian court to enforce the arbitral awards, and Chevron and Danos appealed. The Nigerian court set aside both arbitral awards on various grounds. Three months later, Baker Marine petitioned the US federal district court to confirm the arbitral awards under the terms of the convention and the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). The district court concluded that enforcement of arbitral awards that had already been set aside by a court of the country in which the award was made would be improper under the terms of the convention and the principles of comity. The district court accordingly denied Baker Marine’s petition. Baker Marine appealed, arguing that the reasons the Nigerian court had set aside the arbitral awards would not be considered valid under the arbitration laws of the US, and US domestic arbitration law should be applied.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Leval, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 824,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 989 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.