案情簡(jiǎn)介：

中國(guó)公司(賣方,，仲裁案被申請(qǐng)人,，委托人）與法國(guó)公司(買方，仲裁案申請(qǐng)人）于2020年初簽署《采購(gòu)協(xié)議》,，約定賣方出售一批醫(yī)用口罩給買方,，總價(jià)6000余萬(wàn)元人民幣，交付時(shí)間為2020年6月之前,，付款時(shí)間為交付貨物之前,，支付方式為現(xiàn)匯?！恫少?gòu)協(xié)議》約定,，協(xié)議受香港地區(qū)法律（英國(guó)法）解釋,，如出現(xiàn)糾紛，向香港國(guó)際仲裁中心申請(qǐng)仲裁,，仲裁語(yǔ)言為英文,。

在后續(xù)的合同履行中，買方?jīng)]有按照約定的時(shí)間支付貨款,，賣方以買支付遲延為由,，晚交貨幾日。

合同履行完畢后,，買方以賣方?jīng)]有按時(shí)交貨為由,，向香港國(guó)際仲裁中心申請(qǐng)仲裁，啟動(dòng)仲裁程序,，索賠直接損失1200萬(wàn)元人民幣,，營(yíng)業(yè)機(jī)會(huì)損失3500萬(wàn)元人民幣（間接損失)。

我方代理意見如下：

經(jīng)過(guò)團(tuán)隊(duì)對(duì)案情及所有證據(jù)的精心分析及研究,，依據(jù)英國(guó)法提出以下代理意見：

一,、關(guān)于交貨時(shí)間的約定?！恫少?gòu)協(xié)議》并未約定交貨時(shí)間是重要（of essence）的條文（相當(dāng)于條件條文）,，故此延誤交貨是可以容忍的，買方在簽署合同是有預(yù)期的,，延誤并不構(gòu)成重大違約,。

二、棄權(quán)與禁反言的問(wèn)題（Waiver and Estoppel),。買方在賣方延誤交貨時(shí)并未主張任何權(quán)利,，而是接受了賣方的延誤交貨，等于接受了賣方的遲延履行,，實(shí)際上就是棄權(quán),，故此不能再主張損失賠償。

三,、營(yíng)業(yè)機(jī)會(huì)損失問(wèn)題,。（1）買方的機(jī)會(huì)損失與賣方的遲延交貨沒有因果關(guān)系,。（2）賣方在簽署《采購(gòu)協(xié)議》時(shí)無(wú)法預(yù)料到,，如《采購(gòu)協(xié)議》不能順利履行，將導(dǎo)致買方不能履行與下游買方的合同的情況,，故此,，關(guān)于該損失賣方不應(yīng)承擔(dān)責(zé)任。

最后,，仲裁庭在綜合本案的證據(jù)及雙方的意見的基礎(chǔ)上,，采納了我方的代理意見,，駁回了申請(qǐng)人的仲裁請(qǐng)求。

仲裁庭的理由如下：

1,、遲延交貨事項(xiàng)

The delay however was not serious. There is nothing in the Agreement tothe effect that time for delivery was of the essence. The mechanism under Clause 5(5)of the Agreement allowing seven days before a claim for liquidated damages or anelection for termination can be made suggested that time for delivery was not of the essence of the Agreement. in any event, no claim for liquidated damages or election for termination was made by the Claimant. The deliveries were accepted by the Claimant without complaint or protest.

大意是：并未約定交貨時(shí)間是重要（of essence）的條文,，遲延交貨被接受并未主張權(quán)利（棄權(quán)）。

2,、營(yíng)業(yè)損失事項(xiàng)

一,、As to the loss of business opportunity , l am not satisfied that the

Claimant has established the causal connection between the termination of periodic orders by M(下游買方） and the Respondent's breach. l say so for three reasons............。

大意是：賣方的遲延交貨與買方的營(yíng)業(yè)損失沒有因果關(guān)系,。

二,、My second reason for dismissing this part of the Claimant's

claim is that even if the Respondent was aware of the terms of the Claimant's Long-term Supply Arrangement with M, such knowledge alone is not enough to hold the Respondent liable.............

大意是：即使賣方知道買方與下游的供貨協(xié)議，但是仍不足以認(rèn)定賣方要承擔(dān)責(zé)任,。