InterChem Asia 2000 PTE. Ltd. v. Oceana Petrochemicals AG
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
373 F. Supp. 2d 340 (2005)
- Written by David Bloom, JD
Facts
InterChem Asia 2000 PTE. Ltd. (InterChem) (plaintiff) and Oceana Petrochemicals AG (Oceana) (defendant) were parties to a contract that contained an arbitration clause. The arbitration clause provided that any disputes arising out of the contract shall be resolved by arbitration and that the American Arbitration Association (AAA) rules would apply. After a dispute arose, InterChem and Oceana went to arbitration. InterChem and Oceana submitted requests for attorney’s fees but did not explicitly authorize the arbitrator to impose such a sanction on the parties’ lawyers. Likewise, the arbitration clause and the AAA rules did not authorize the arbitrator to sanction the lawyers. The arbitrator sanctioned both Oceana and Oceana’s attorney, Richard DiDonna, for not timely producing documents during the arbitration. As a sanction, the arbitrator directed Oceana and DiDonna to pay InterChem’s legal fees. InterChem motioned the court to confirm the arbitration award. Oceana moved to vacate the sanction award.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Marrero, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.