Government of India v. Cargill, Inc.

Cargill, Inc. (defendant) entered four contracts with the Government of India (India) (plaintiff) for the purchase of wheat. Each contract required India to pay Cargill carrying charges for India’s delay in loading its ships with the purchased grain. The contracts included arbitration clauses providing that disputes would be resolved through the American Arbitration Association (AAA) under its Grain Arbitration Rules (GAR). Five of India’s ships carrying the grain had delays in loading the shipments. Cargill submitted invoices to India for the agreed-upon carrying charges owed. The parties were unable to resolve the disputed invoiced amounts, and Cargill initiated arbitration with the AAA. The arbitration panel received the parties’ briefs on February 3, 1987. The panel closed the hearing on March 23 and advised that an award would be made within 30 days. On April 13, the panel decided in favor of Cargill, awarding Cargill a lump-sum payment that did not itemize the damages among the five invoices in dispute. India did not object to the timeliness of the award or the failure of the panel to itemize damages. However, India subsequently filed a petition in district court seeking to vacate the award, arguing that the proceedings closed on February 3 and that the award was untimely. The district court denied India’s motion, and India appealed. India argued that the award was unenforceable for being untimely and failing to itemize the damages.