Version du Règlement: 1998

Demandeur : fabricant de machines agricoles (France)

Défendeur : entreprise commerciale générale (Ukraine)

Les parties conclurent un contrat relatif à la vente de machines agricoles par le demandeur au défendeur. Le paiement de ces machines devait intervenir en quatre versements, dont seul le premier fut effectué. A défaut d'accord sur un report de paiement, le demandeur délivra au défendeur un avis de manquement, lui demandant de restituer les machines. Les parties n'ayant pas trouvé de terrain d'entente pour la résolution de leur différend, le demandeur déposa une demande d'arbitrage, afin d'obtenir la restitution des machines et le paiement du solde du prix de vente des machines, majoré des intérêts et déduction faite de la valeur des machines. Le tribunal arbitral, constitué d'un arbitre unique, examina tout d'abord si l'avis de manquement était bien valable aux termes du contrat entre les parties. Répondant par l'affirmative, il décida qu'en conséquence toutes les sommes restant dues étaient immédiatement exigibles et que le demandeur était en droit de prendre possession des machines. Le montant dû au demandeur correspondait donc au solde resté impayé déduction faite de la valeur des machines, si cette valeur était inférieure à la somme du montant resté impayé et des intérêts à recouvrer. A propos de l'évaluation des machines, le tribunal arbitral déclara :

'In the absence [of] evidence of the value of the machinery Claimant's monetary claim must be deferred for a later Award. By this Award the parties are given directions for such evidence.

This Award also provides for the immediate return of the machinery to Claimant. In addition, Claimant has sought orders for the conservation of the machinery and access to it pending its return to Claimant, and for the provision to Claimant by Defendant of the original customs declaration (or a certified copy or duplicate thereof). Notice of Claimant's intention to seek these orders was given to Defendant on . . . after the matter had been considered in the course of the hearing at which Defendant was not present. Defendant has not made any specific objection to the orders sought although, as has been stated earlier, it has submitted by its post closing comments, that no award for the delivery of the machinery need be made.

The Tribunal has the power pursuant to Article 23 of the Rules to order any interim or conservatory measure it deems appropriate. In view of the main findings of this Award, it is in the Tribunal's view plainly appropriate that the substance of the interim and conservatory measures sought by Claimant should be provided for. This is to assist in the preservation of the machinery and the provision of evidence as to value.

. . .

As it is likely that further costs will be incurred in connection with the provision of valuation evidence and in relation to the preparation of another award dealing with the monetary claims, it is not appropriate for the Tribunal to fix the costs of the arbitration in this Award. The Tribunal therefore reserves the costs of the arbitration for such an award.

. . .

Accordingly (for the reasons given in this Award), the Tribunal awards, declares and orders that:

. . .

As conservatory and interim orders (pending possession):

The Defendant must:

(1) give immediate possession of the original customs declaration in respect of the said machinery (or a duly certified copy or duplicate thereof) to the Claimant;

(2) immediately disclose to the Claimant the whereabouts of the said machinery;

(3) allow to the Claimant and/or its nominated representatives immediate access to the said machinery upon request; and

(4) refrain from any further use of the said machinery.

. . .'