MEMORANDUM OF ADVICE

Heavy lift Hauliers Ltd (HH) have a contract for delivery of livestock and poultry from United Farmers
(UK) Ltd (UF) in Bradford to Riga in Latvia. One of the importers in Latvia Riga Meat Products SIA
(RMP) has a contract with UF for the supply of 100 beef cattle and 200 sheep to be delivered by 30
October 2021. Due to a driver shortage UF is unable to meet the scale of their contract obligations
by the due date. Thus, by 30 October 2021 RMP received only 20 beef cattle and 50 sheep. RMP are
unable to meet their customers demands as a result and suffer serious financial loss. The UF/RMP
contract contains an arbitration clause subject to the LCIA Rules of Arbitration but does not specify
the place of arbitration. The underlying contract for the sale of the cattle is subject to English Law.
RMP instruct you to advise on how they might recover their losses which in total amount to
€250,000. In your advice they ask that you advise further on the following issues:

1. Where is the arbitration most likely to take place and what conflict of laws rules will apply?

2. How would UF join HH in the any proceedings and what, if any, advantage would that give
them?

3. What if the tribunal were to award the claimants RMP €150,000 and it was subsequently
discovered that UF had introduced evidence procured by a fraud in relation to the cattle price?