COSCO SHIPPING PROJECT LOGISTICS CO. LIMITED vs SHANGHAI MARINE DIESEL ENGINE RESEARCH INSTITUTE Ss — 2026 PLD 58 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Citation: 2026 PLD 58 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
Court: Sindh High Court
Year: 2026
Reporter: PLD
Parties: COSCO SHIPPING PROJECT LOGISTICS CO. LIMITED vs SHANGHAI MARINE DIESEL ENGINE RESEARCH INSTITUTE Ss
Subject matter: Civil
Provisions referred to: S. 1; Scope---The Act; Limitation Act; Arbitration Act

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Judgment text as reported

COSCO SHIPPING PROJECT LOGISTICS CO. LIMITED VS SHANGHAI MARINE DIESEL ENGINE RESEARCH INSTITUTE Ss.1, 6 & 7---Foreign arbitral awards---Recognition and enforcement---Claim being barred by limitation, plea of---Legality---Duty of courts---Pro-enforcement regime viz. foreign arbitral awards---Scope---The Act came into force on 19.07.2011 and perusal of S. 1 thereof demonstrates that it applied to arbitration agreements made before, on or after the said date and encompassed foreign arbitral awards made after 14.07.2005---Therefore, it would hold that any qualifying arbitration agreement, irrespective of date of execution thereof, culminating in an award made after 14.07.2005 could be recognized and enforced---Retrospective nature of the Act has been expressly recognized and given effect to---Limitation Act, 1908 provides a period of limitation for filing of an award per the Arbitration Act 1940 and not with regard to enforcement under the Recognition and Enforcement (Arbitration Agreements and Foreign Arbitral Awards) Act 2011---Nevertheless, any import of the Arbitration Act, 1940 is specifically disallowed in enforcement of foreign arbitral awards---Court is required to support not supplant the arbitral process and its discretion is precluded to interfere in the merits of a case on points off act or law---Court should circumscribe opposition within the remit of Art. V of the New York Convention, while emphasizing that the stipulations may be read as permissive and not mandatory.

Other judgments reported in 2026 PLD

2026 PLD 17 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRSECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION, AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR, MUZAFFARABAD VS JALIL-UR-REHMAN TAREEN. art. 4…
2026 PLD 17 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRSECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION, AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR, MUZAFFARABAD VS JALIL-UR-REHMAN TAREEN. Photos…
2026 PLD 17 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRSECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION, AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR, MUZAFFARABAD VS JALIL-UR-REHMAN TAREEN. art. 4…
2026 PLD 17 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRSECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION, AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR, MUZAFFARABAD VS JALIL-UR-REHMAN TAREEN. art. 4…
2026 PLD 17 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRSECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION, AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR, MUZAFFARABAD VS JALIL-UR-REHMAN TAREEN. art. 4…
2026 PLD 12 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRAURANGZEB SIDDIQUI VS State. S. 302(b)---arms act (XX of 1965), S. 13---Qatl-i-amd, possession of illicit weapon---appreciation of evidence-…

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English