Bimini Shipping LLC (the respondent) shipped goods owned by Federal Contracting Inc (the appellant) from Miami, Florida, to the Bahamas. The contract of carriage contained an arbitration agreement providing that '[a]ll disputes arising out of this contract shall be arbitrated in Miami-Dade County, Florida.'

The appellant alleged that the goods were damaged during shipment. It sent the respondent a timely letter demanding arbitration but did not receive a response. It subsequently filed a complaint in the Miami-Dade Circuit Court to select an arbitrator and compel arbitration.

The respondent filed a motion to dismiss the respondent's complaint, arguing that the suit was barred by the one-year statute of limitations in the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, 46 USC app § 1303 (COGSA). The appellant argued that the limitation period defence had to be decided by an arbitrator under the arbitration clause. The trial Court granted the respondent's motion and dismissed the appellant's complaint.

The appellant appealed.

Held: Appeal granted.

The Court reversed the trial Judge's holding and instructed the trial Court to vacate its order and issue a new order granting the appellant its motion to compel arbitration, without prejudice to the respondent's raising all appropriate defences that it might have during the arbitration process.

The Court held that the one-year period for bringing action against the carrier in COGSA was a statute of limitations, not a statute of repose. Florida law favours arbitration as a matter of public policy, and broad arbitration provisions should be construed in favour of allowing arbitration of the disputed subject matter. In general, issues of timeliness were to be decided by the arbitrator in cases subject to arbitration. Accordingly, the issue of whether the limitation period barred the appellant's complaint was to be decided by the arbitrator, rather than the trial Court.