Bird & Bird secures important judgment for Destin Trading Inc in The High Court

Contacts

sophie eyre module
Sophie Eyre

Partner
UK

I am a partner and co-head of our International Dispute Resolution Group, as well as the London team. I specialise in complex disputes, often of a cross border nature, and have particular expertise in the aviation & defence sector, commercial life science, and in matters involving fraud.

federico valle Module
Federico Valle

Partner
Italy

Working as a partner with our corporate team in Milan, I am focused on equity and debt capital markets. I provide assistance on complex transactions as well as day-to-day issues, working with major business banks and companies listed on the Italian Stock Exchange.

harry arnold Module
Harry Arnold

Associate
UK

I am an associate in our Dispute Resolution Group in London, assisting clients with their contentious issues and commercial disputes.

International law firm Bird & Bird acted for the successful party in Destin Trading Inc v Saipem SA [2025] EWHC 668 (Ch). Saipem claimed that an English action should be stayed under s9 Arbitration Act 1996 because the settlement agreement had an inconsistent dispute resolution clause to the prior agreements which it was terminating/settling. The settlement agreement had an exclusive jurisdiction clause in favour of the English Courts whereas the prior agreements had ICC arbitration. The action relates to a claim by Destin to set aside the settlement agreement for fraudulent misrepresentation and claiming certain monies that it would have earned under the prior agreements. Saipem claimed that the monetary claims arose out of the prior agreements such that the arbitration clauses therein should apply. 

The Court refused the stay, confirming the principle that a dispute resolution clause in a subsequent settlement agreement will generally supersede an earlier dispute resolution clause. Andrew Lenon KC, sitting as a High Court judge, said that there is “clear authority for the proposition that dispute resolution clauses in a settlement or termination agreement should generally be construed on the basis that they are intended to have a superseding or overriding effect”; and (at [40]) that, even if the court applied a two-stage test as Saipem proposed, the application would still fail at the first stage (identifying the substance of the dispute between the parties) because in substance the “legal source” of the monetary relief claims was the settlement and the general law of deceit, not the prior agreements.

The core team at Bird & Bird advising Destin included partners Sophie Eyre, Federico Valle and associate Harry Arnold.

News & Deals

More News & Deals

News

Bird & Bird recognised in Global Arbitration Review’s "GAR 100" list

Apr 25 2025

Read More

Deal

Bird & Bird advises the L'Oréal Group on its exclusive beauty partnership with JACQUEMUS, as well as on its minority stake acquisition

Apr 24 2025

Read More

News

Bird & Bird participates in JuriAI Ring to establish world’s first AI benchmarking index for legal sector

Apr 23 2025

Read More

News

Bird & Bird strengthens leadership in Finland office to support growth ambitions

Apr 22 2025

Read More

News

First hearing for PI damages per RoP 213.2 at the UPC - another “first” for Bird & Bird and its clients NanoString/Bruker

Apr 22 2025

Read More

News

Bird & Bird China wins CBLJ "Deals of the Year 2024"

Apr 17 2025

Read More

Related capabilities