UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
March 27, 1979
IN THE MATTER OF THE ARBITRATION BETWEEN A. HALCOUSSIS SHIPPING LTD., OWNERS OF THE M/V EGEON, PETITIONER-APPELLEE,
THOMAS P. GONZALEZ CORPORATION, AS CHARTERERS, RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
Present: HONORABLE J. EDWARD LUMBARD, HONORABLE WILFRED FEINBERG, HONORABLE JAMES L. OAKES, Circuit Judges.
This cause came on to be heard on the transcript of record from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, and was submitted by counsel.
ON CONSIDERATION WHEREOF, it is now hereby ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the judgment of said District Court be and it hereby is AFFIRMED.
This is an appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Constance Baker Motley, J., denying a motion to vacate an arbitration award for approximately $160,000 plus interest. The arbitrated dispute involved a ship owner and a charterer in connection with the carriage of a large quantity of tallow from New Orleans to Algiers. Upon the ship's arrival in Algiers, the ship owner was informed that the receiver of the cargo would not be ready to accept delivery for a period of approximately thirty days. At that point the ship owner requested that the charterer post security for the accruing demurrage charges, which was not done, and the charterer requested the ship owner's permission to divert the cargo to Alexandria, which was refused. The ship owner then demanded that the charterer arbitrate its claim for demurrage charges under the arbitration clause contained in the charter party. The claim was arbitrated only after the ship owner obtained an order from the district court directing the charterer to arbitrate. The arbitrator then entered the award that the charterer sought to vacate below. Judge Motley upheld the award because the charterer had failed "to allege any basis for vacating the award."
On this appeal, as below, the charterer argues, in effect, that the arbitrator's decision is so erroneous that there must have been fraud. This is simply a transparent attempt to reargue the merits of the arbitrated claim. Even if the arbitrator's decision is wrong, that is not ground for vacating the award. We think this appeal is frivolous, and we affirm the judgment of the district court refusing to vacate the award.
We award an additional 4 percent interest to appellee in view of the frivolity of the appeal.
© 1998 VersusLaw Inc.