Author: Haugen Consulting
ASBATANKVOY -- LAYCAN -- LAYTIME -- NOR -- APPEAL -- LOADING PRIOR TO LAYCAN -- Partial Owner Award
This is the appellate award for Tidebrook v. Vitol. Upon acknowledging that the Vessel would arrive before laycan, the Charterer sent several messages to the Vessel requesting that she tender NOR upon arrival with the intent of commencing loading prior to laycan; which she did. The Owner argued that this signified the commencement of laytime due to Charterer-given consent; however, the Charterer contends that they merely requested an early NOR.
ASBATANKVOY -- VESSEL -- ARBITRATION -- CHARTER PARTY -- LOADPORT -- CANCELLATION DUE LATE ARRIVAL – MARKET LOSS -- Owner Award
After engine problems delayed the original Vessel from arriving at loadport, the Charterers cancelled the Charter Party with the Owners and chartered another vessel to take its place. At arbitration, the Charterers held the Owners in full responsibility for failing to provide a timely vessel and demanded compensation for resulting market loss.
ASBATANKVOY -- CARGO -- PORT -- LAYTIME -- ARBITRATION -- DEMURRAGE -- NOR VALIDITY -- Owner Award
After arriving at port and once approved for loading, the Vessel tendered NOR, but waited fourteen days before berthing. However, before load operations could commence, onboard hydraulic problems delayed cargo loading further and gave the Charterers fodder to claim that the NOR tender was premature. The Charterers argued that if the Vessel was not ready to load in all respects, then laytime cannot commence.
ASBATANKVOY -- LOADPORT -- BERTH -- DETENTION -- DEMURRAGE -- INDEMNITY -- CONSOLIDATION OF POTENTIAL CLAIMS INVOLVING MULTIPLE PARTIES -- Partial Charterer Award
A collapsed breasting fender at loadport caused an eleven day berthing delay for the Vessel, subsequently allowing the Owner to file for a demurrage claim. The Charterers counterclaimed that the fender collapse was caused by the Vessel and demanded indemnity for demurrage on four other vessels and indemnity for a potential damages claim from the dock owner.
VEGOILVOY -- ARBITRATION -- CHARTER -- LOADPORT -- CHARTER PARTY -- CARGO -- VOYAGE -- DEADFREIGHT -- PAYMENT AND CALCULATION OF DEADFREIGHT -- Owner Award
The Owners brought arbitration against three separate Charterers in order to collect lost profits from an improper cancellation. Six days before arriving at loadport, the Owner received a message asking Him/Her to cancel the Charter Party because the cargo was unavailable. However, because voyage was underway and there was no locatable substitute cargo, the Vessel arrived, tendered NOR, and sailed with deadfreight.
GENCON -- LOADPORT -- BERTH -- SHIFTING -- DETENTION -- DEMURRAGE -- WHETHER CHARTERER LIABLE FOR DETENTION OR BREACH OF CHARTER FOR FAILURE TO BERTH VESSEL – WHETHER CHARTERER AT FAULT FOR BERTHING VESSEL OUT OF TURN – VALIDITY OF NOR -- Owner Award
Although the Vessel had arrived and tendered NOR at loadport, another vessel was berthed out of turn. Subsequently, the Owner claimed detention at the demurrage rate for the four days of delay that the Charterer incurred by berthing the second vessel out of turn.
NYPE -- ARBITRATION -- VOYAGE -- DRAFT -- TANKER -- DISPORT -- TIME CHARTER – CHARTERER ORDERING VESSEL TO LOAD TO ARRIVAL DRAFT OF 11 METRES – OWNER REFUSING BASIS OFFICIAL DRAFT RESTRICTION AT DISPORT OF 10.5 METRES -- Owner Award
This arbitration centers on the Owner’s refusal to load His/Her vessels on four voyages during March/May to a full arrival draft of eleven meters. Instead, He/She used a safer draft of 10.5 meters in accordance with Navtex costal warnings during these months. The Charterers, however, brought arbitration against the Owner with evidence that the discharge port authority was berthing vessels up to the desired eleven meters draft.
ASBATANKVOY -- BARGE -- LOADPORT -- DEMURRAGE -- TERMINAL -- ARBITRATION -- ACT OF GOD -- DETENTION -- MITIGATE -- LATE CARGO -- BERTHING DELAY -- Owner Award
After an initial barge loading failure at the original loadport, the Owner mitigated the Charterer’s demurrage and fixed the new loadport as the Owner’s terminal. The Vessel tendered NOR at the terminal, but was forced to wait three days for the Charterer’s barges to arrive because of rough seas and lock delays. The subsequent demurrage claim for the three day delay was refuted in arbitration by the Charterers on the grounds that the weather and lock detentions were out of their control, and therefore exempt from demurrage.
ASBATANKVOY -- LAYTIME -- CARGO -- CHARTER PARTY -- STOWAGE -- LAYCAN -- DEADFREIGHT -- WRONGFUL CANCELLATION -- Owner Award
During laytime, and after the Charterer’s cargo was partially loaded, the Charterer altered the agreed amount of cargo as specified by the Charter Party, thereby incurring stowage delays and confusion in the loading plan. After these delays extended loadtime past laycan, the Charterer cancelled the voyage and refused responsibility for the resulting deadfreight claiming that the delays resulted from the Vessel’s unreadiness to load.
ASBATANKVOY -- DEMURRAGE -- ARBITRATION -- PRORATE -- INCREASED DEMURRAGE INVOICE -- Owner Award
In order to collect outstanding demurrage claims, the Owner started arbitration; however, originally, the claim was erroneously calculated with a lower prorated waiting time which the Owner raised at arbitration. The Charterers argued that they were exempt from this new rate because they believed it to be punitive and an alteration of the original contract.
