Introduction

1. This is an appeal against an order dated 2nd May 2001 made by HHJ Chambers QC, sitting as a deputy judge in the Commercial Court. Permission to appeal was granted by Tuckey LJ on 18th June 2001. By a majority award dated 21st March 2000, a Swedish arbitration panel concluded that the appellants had become party to a contract in writing dated 17th January 1995 which contained the arbitration clause under which the panel purported to act, and which was made originally between WAII and A.O. Yuganskenftegas (“YNG”). The respondents have succeeded to WAII’s interest as a result of three assignments, the first of which was to PetroAlliance Services Co. Ltd. (“PetroAlliance”). The appellants held under 50% of the shares in YNG until the start of the arbitration (although they appear at all times to have had control over YNG) and have, subsequent to the arbitration, increased their shareholding on the evidence to about 90% (and now, we are told by the respondents, 100%). In consequence of its conclusion that the appellants had become party to the contract, the panel made an award against the appellants in the sum of $6 million plus interest, making a total of around $12 million. In a previous arbitration, conducted separately, the same panel had made a like award dated 7th May 1999 against YNG, rejecting complaints made by YNG about PetroAlliance’s performance of the contract. The appellants on 22nd May 2000 issued proceedings in the Stockholm District Court to have the award against them set aside on the grounds of lack of jurisdiction. These proceedings to set aside are still in progress.