Author: Haugen Consulting

Midas Shipping Co. Inc. v. PDVSA Petroleo SA (The “Liberia”) – SMA No. 4153, 16 Dec 2011

PDVSA TIME 2006 -- TIME-CHARTER -- EXTRA WAR RISK INSURANCE -- INSURANCE PREMIUM -- INTEREST CALCULATION -- Owner Award Charterer failed to pay the Extra War Risk Insurance Premiums and interest that was allowed within the charter party. The Panel revised the Owner’s interest rate and calculation methodology.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Korea Line Corp. v. CMC Cometals (The “Namrun”) – SMA No. 4156, 23 Dec 2011

MEDITERRANEAN CHARTER PARTY -- ETA SUBMITTED WITH INCORRECT CALL SIGN -- BERTHING DELAY -- INVALID NOR -- BERTH OR PORT CHARTER -- WIBON -- Owner Award Albeit quickly corrected, Master initially submitted an ETA with an incorrect Vessel call sign which per Charterer, caused the Vessel to be held out at anchorage whilst correcting the paperwork with the Chinese Authorities. As such, per Charterer the NOR is invalid. Further, per Charterer the charter party was of a berth nature, with NOR subsequently only effective in regards to the commencement of laytime upon the Vessel's arrival in berth.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Glencore Energy (UK) Ltd. v. Sonol Israel Ltd. (The “Team Anmaj”) – QBD (Comm. Ct.), 26 Oct 2011

EXXONVOY 84 -- CONTRACT OF SALE -- DEMURRAGE -- INDEMNITY -- CAUSE OF ACTION -- TIME BAR -- Buyer Award The relationship between demurrage clauses in the sale contract, underlying charter party, and the relevant commercial background determines what constitutes the accrual of the cause of action for Seller’s claim against the Buyer. The issue that the contract was finalized after the completion of discharge is broached.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Pacific Basin IHX Ltd. v. Bulkhandling Handymax AS (The “Triton Lark”) – QBD (Comm. Ct.), 25 Jan 2012

NYPE -- TIME-CHARTER -- RISK OF PIRACY -- CONWARTIME 1993 --GULF OF ADEN -- ALLEGED DEVIATION AROUND CAPE OF GOOD HOPE -- Charterer Award Due to the inherent risk of piracy along the contracted route, the Owner instructed the Vessel to change course incurring additional costs for Charterer’s account. The arbitrators held that the Owner acted appropriately. On appeal the Court ruled that the arbitration panel had deconstructed the CONWARTIME 1993 clause improperly and, as such, remanded the case back to the arbitrators for reconsideration on findings of fact.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Hyundai Merchant Marine Co. Ltd. v. Trafigura Beheer BV (The “Gaz Energy”) – QBD (Comm. Ct.), 25 May 2012

SHELLTIME 3 -- TIME CHARTER -- SPEED WARRANTY -- PERFORMANCE CLAUSE -- UNDERPERFORMANCE -- BUNKER CONSUMPTION -- ALL WEATHER WARRANTY -- Charterer Award The sub-charterer contends that the time-chartered vessel did not meet the contracted requirements for speed and fuel performance basis the construction of the relevant clauses. Such construction is based on the inclusion of an all weather warranty, which the owners claim is not proper in the context of this time-charter.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Progress Bulk Carriers Ltd. v. Tube City IMS LLC (The “Cenk Kaptanoglu”) – QBD (Comm. Ct.), 17 Feb 2012

GENCON -- ECONOMIC DURESS -- REPUDIATORY BREACH OF CONTRACT -- VESSEL SUBSTITUTION -- Charterer Award Although Owner’s action of substituting the contracted vessel without notifying the Charterer created a repudiatory breach, the Charterer did not cancel the charter. Owner proposed a new vessel and promised to reimburse the Charterer for damages, however they later used economic leverage to gain a better deal during renegotiation.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Seadancer, SMA No. 4131

ASBATANKVOY -- FLOATING STORAGE -- DELAYS CAUSING OWNER’S FOLLOW-ON FIXTURE TO BE CANCELLED -- DETENTION -- LOST PROFITS -- FORESEEABILITY -- Charterer Award Under a voyage charter, wherein the clause allowing Charterer the option of using Vessel as floating storage had been deleted, Vessel was delayed at disport causing the subsequent fixture between Owner and another charterer, made at the peak of the market, to be cancelled. Owner claimed for damages in the form of profits lost from the cancelled fixture.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Seaarland Shipping Management BV v. Standard Tankers Bahamas Ltd. (The “Elisewin”) – SMA No. 4137, 21 Jun 2011

EXXONMOBIL VOY 2005 -- "NIGERIAN 8:00 A.M. RULE" -- DELAYS DUE MASTER’S REFUSAL TO SIGN BACKDATED BILL OF LADING (B/L) -- Charterer Award When Vessel concluded loading prior to 8 a.m. on the first day of the month, Charterer requested Master to sign a backdated B/L allegedly in accordance with Nigerian law and also allegedly a requirement of Clause 27 (a) of Part II of ExxonMobilvoy 2005. When Master refused to sign without a Letter of Indemnity Vessel was delayed in departing for six days for which Charterer refused to pay demurrage.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Citgo Petroleum Corp. v. Pulot Enterprises, Inc. (The “Stinice”) – SMA No. 4139, 5 Aug 2011

ASBATANKVOY -- CLAUSE PARAMOUNT -- COGSA -- CARGO CONTAMINATION -- Charterer Award When cargo was found to be contaminated onboard the vessel at the discharge port, Charterer argued that COGSA applied and subsequently attempted to show that the cargo was loaded onboard the Vessel in good condition and discharged in a damaged condition.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Gretchen Shipping Inc. v. Commodities & Minerals Enterprises, Ltd. (The “Christoffer Oldendorf” renamed “General Piar”) – SMA No. 4140, 16 Aug 2011

BALTIME 1939 -- MASTER OVERWRITING FIGURES ON DEPARTURE DOCUMENTS -- DEPARTURE DELAY WHILE AGENT PREPARES NEW DOCUMENTS -- OFF-HIRE -- Charterer Award Upon completion of loading Master first refused to sign required departure documents before striking through figures and writing in what he considered to be the correct amounts. There was subsequently a 24-hour delay whilst new documents were prepared which the Master signed as presented with his disagreements noted on the bottom. Against Owner’s wishes, Charterer subsequently deducted the 24-hour period from money owed for bunkers.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.