Author: Haugen Consulting
PORT AUTHORITY -- BERTH -- DEMURRAGE -- DETENTION -- BERTH CLOSURE -- Owner Award
After repeatedly delaying its ETA, the Vessel ultimately arrived, but the port authority had closed the berth for scheduled maintenance. In response to the subsequent Owner demurrage claim, the Charterer counterclaimed that neither the maintenance nor the delays leading to the prolonged ETA were in His/Her control.
ASBATANKVOY -- LOADPORT -- CHARTER PARTY -- BERTH -- CARGO -- DEMURRAGE -- ARBITRATION -- TANK CLEANLINESS -- Charterer Award
Upon arriving at loadport after a new cargo revision in the Charter Party, the Vessel was kicked off of berth because of survey results revealing that the Vessel’s tanks were insufficiently cleaned for the revised cargo. The Owner submitted demurrage for the cleaning costs and delays arguing that the tanks were acceptable for the original cargo.
ASBATANKVOY -- CHARTER PARTY -- DEMURRAGE -- TERMINAL LOGS -- TIME-BAR -- Charterer Award
This case’s Charter Party clearly stipulates that there are no grounds for demurrage unless the claim (along with supporting documentation) is received within ninety days of cargo discharge. So when the Owner submitted a claim on the ninetieth day without the specifically outlined terminal logs, the Charterer deemed the demurrage time-barred by the Charter Party.
GENCON 76 -- BERTH -- CANAL -- WEATHER -- ACT OF GOD -- LOADPORT -- DEMURRAGE -- DETENTION -- Owner Award
After loading was completed, a latent document delivery to the Vessel detained it at berth for an extra 14.5H. The Charterer did not contest His/Her fault in the delay, however, He/She argues that the canal was concurrently closed due to adverse weather for several days and the time spent at berth during this closure should be deducted from the claim.
GENCON -- BERTH -- DEMURRAGE -- LAYTIME -- ARBITRATION -- VESSEL DEFICIENCIES – VALIDITY OF NOR -- Owner Award
When the Charterer’s pilot boarded the Vessel to begin berthing six days after NOR declaration, the pilot noted operational deficiencies and refused to berth the Vessel until repaired. The Owner subsequently filed for demurrage beginning at NOR tender while the Charterer argued that NOR cannot be considered a valid beginning of laytime because of Vessel unreadiness at berthing.
ASBATANKVOY -- SHIP-TO-SHIP -- DEMURRAGE -- ARBITRATION -- LOADPORT -- STS TRANSFER – WHETHER NOR WAS TENDERED -- VALIDITY OF NOR -- Charterer Award
This case began with Charterer allegations that the Vessel did not tender NOR for this STS transfer—or if it did, it was invalid and premature. The Owner, however, counterclaimed that when the Charterer remitted partial payment of the demurrage claim, they thereby admitted validity to the Vessel’s NOR and sacrificed their right to challenge it.
CONTRACT OF AFFREIGHTMENT -- BERTH -- DISPORT -- DREDGE PIPE -- CHANNEL -- GROUNDING -- ARBITRATION -- UNSAFE BERTH -- Charterer Award
While moving to berth at disport, the Vessel ran aground on an abandoned dredge pipe in the navigation channel. The Owner followed suit with an arbitration charge for the damages sustained in the grounding, claiming that the Charterer had breached the safe berth warranty. The Charterer counterclaimed that the Owner faulted the grounding citing the Owner’s frequent usage of the port in the past as well as the lack of prior Owner proof that the berth was unsafe.
NORGRAIN 89 -- CHARTER PARTY -- GOVERNMENT CURFEW -- CARGO -- DEMURRAGE -- BERTH -- DISPORT -- Owner Award
The Charter Party specifically stated that if cargo cannot be discharged because of "Civil Commotions," then there cannot be any demurrage claim for lost time. But, when the Vessel berthed at disport and a national curfew was in place, the Owner filed for demurrage regardless arguing that the curfew did not prevent the cargo from being discharged, but instead the subsequent lack of trucks leaving the port was the root cause of detainment.
ASBATANKVOY -- ARBITRATION -- PUMP WARRANTY -- MANIFOLD -- DEMURRAGE -- LATE PAYMENT -- PUMP WARRANTY -- Owner Award
This arbitration centers around the finer aspects of the pump warranty. In this case, the Charterers argue that the agreed pressure at the Vessel’s manifold was not maintained throughout the unloading. The Owners, on the other hand, stipulate that the referenced pressure drops were at the beginning and end of discharge, a common safety and loss prevention practice.
SALES CONTRACT -- SHIPPING -- DEMURRAGE -- ARBITRATION -- DETENTION -- PORT -- CARGO -- VETTING -- Buyer Award
The Buyer preliminarily contacted the Seller to ask if the Vessel characteristics agreed with Seller requirements for shipping. After granting approval, the Seller allegedly sent documents stipulating that the agreement was conditional on whether the Vessel had an operating VR system. However, the Buyer never received such stipulations and submitted demurrage for delays at port when the Seller refused Vessel loading without VR.
