Category: Archive

Archive / U.S. Maritime Cases

Blystad Shipping & Transport, Inc. v. Trammochem, Inc. (The “Aniara”) – SMA No. 3574, 19 Nov 1999

ASBATANKVOY -- LOADPORT -- BERTH -- ICE BREAKER -- CARGO -- PORT -- VOYAGE -- Charterer Award Because the loadport’s national ice service increased ice class limitations on entering vessels, the Vessel was denied access to berth, and subsequently, the voyage was terminated. The Owners blame the Charterers for failing in their obligation to find a safe berth upon arrival. Conversely, the Charterers argue that their supplier could not provide cargo at another port and accuse the Owners of failing to provide an appropriate vessel for the voyage.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Archive / U.S. Maritime Cases

Chembulk Trading, Inc. v. Jo Tankers, BV (The “Chembulk Singapore”) – SMA No. 3531, 13 Apr 1999

MOBILVOY 96 -- PART CARGO -- DEADFREIGHT -- CARGO -- Partial Owner Award The Charterers refused to load their decene part cargo because of excess temperature inflowing from adjacent heating tanks. The Owners subsequently filed for deadfreight damages and claimed that the Charterers had allowed cargo loading in a similar case a year earlier. The Charterers, however, denied payment because of the Owner’s failure to provide "a suitable safe space for the cargo."
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Archive / U.S. Maritime Cases

American Eagle Tankers Inc., Ltd. v. Basis Petroleum, Inc. And Blue Circled Shipping Co., Ltd. (The “Bregen”) – SMA No. 3537, 8 Jun 1999

ASBATANKVOY -- VALVE -- DISPONENT -- LIGHTERING -- BERTH -- DISPORT -- NOR -- PORT -- DEMURRAGE -- CHARTER PARTY -- SEAWORTHINESS -- DUE DILIGENCE -- Owner Award Due to a valve malfunction, the Disponent Owners’ nominated lightering Vessel missed her berth call at disport and was forced to re-tender NOR. The Owners then argued that the delays incurred at port were beyond their control and likewise defined as demurrage by the charter. But the Sub-Charterers refused their claim per Vessel unseaworthiness and lack of Owners’ due diligence.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Archive / U.S. Maritime Cases

Stolt Tankers, Inc. v. Transmare-Chemi Handelgsellschaft Mbh (The “Sun Sapphire”) – SMA No. 3539, 9 Jun 1999

ASBATANKVOY -- PORT -- NOR -- WAIVER -- BERTH -- Charterer Award Because the port only accepted Vessels less than 16 years of age, the 1975-built Vessel was quickly rejected after tendering her NOR. The Charterers argued that the NOR was invalid due to the Owners’ failure to obtain a waiver and conform to the port regulations. The Owners, on the other hand, contend that the Charterers customarily acquire the waiver. And furthermore, the berth was congested upon arrival, meaning that no time was lost in obtaining the waiver.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Archive / U.S. Maritime Cases

Bergesen DY Handygas v. Montpelier Trading Inc. (The “LPG/C Havbris”) – SMA No. 3503, 20 Jan 1999

ASBATANKVOY -- PORT -- DISPORT -- FREIGHT -- LOI -- BERTH -- DEMURRAGE -- Owner Award Before arriving at the contracted discharge port, the Charterers fixed a new disport per Charterers’ option. But upon arrival, the Owners refused to begin unloading until both the full freight payment and an LOI had been received from the new Receivers. The Vessel waited at berth for six days before payment, which the Owners submitted to the Charterers as demurrage.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Archive / U.S. Maritime Cases

Krupp Seeschiffahrt Gmbh v. Bayoil Supply & Trading Lt. (The “Ruhr Ore”) – SMA No. 3504, 15 Jan 1999

ASBATANKVOY -- DEMURRAGE -- USCG -- OFF-HIRE -- BREAKDOWN -- Owner Award Although the Charterers paid a majority of the demurrage claim, they refused to consider the two USCG-mandated 6H "crew rest periods" as demurrage. The Charterers argued that these rest periods are comparable to a Vessel “breakdown,” and as such, would render the Vessel off-hire and be for the Owners’ account.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Archive / U.S. Maritime Cases

Delphina Tanker Corp. v. Axel Johnson Energy Corp. (The “Delphina”) – SMA No. 3508, 5 Feb 1999

ASBATANKVOY -- BERTH -- DISPORT -- CHANNEL -- PORT -- ARBITRATION -- Charterer Award En route to berth at disport, the Vessel ran aground on an unchartered obstruction and spilled 16,000 gal. of cargo into the channel. The Owners argued that the berth was obviously unsafe due to the presence of an undiscovered rock at berth and demanded compensation. The Charterers, however, maintain that the berth was safe while citing instances of sister vessels berthing at port with no incidents.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Archive / U.S. Maritime Cases

Stolt Tankers, Inc. v. Clarissa Shipping Co. Ltd. (The “Lacerta”) – SMA No. 3515, 5 Mar 1999

SHELLTIME 3 -- VOYAGE -- CARGO -- CONTAMINATION -- SALVAGE -- TIME-BAR -- COSGA -- Partial Owner Award At some point along the voyage, the cargo had become contaminated and had to be sold as salvage at a great loss to the sub-charterers. The Charterers presented a timely claim to the Owners and communication about reimbursement continued between parties over the next year until the Vessel Owners declared the claim time-barred under COSGA.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Archive / U.S. Maritime Cases

Paige International Ltd. v. Adam Maritime Corp. and Glencore Ltd. (The “Saint Vassilios”) – SMA No. 3491, 11 Dec 1998

ASBATANKVOY -- CHARTER PARTY -- DECK LINES -- DEMURRAGE -- Owner Award As per the Charter Party, a cargo of LSWR was meant to be loaded between 125F – 135F, however, the LSWR was loaded at 115F – 120F which caused it to congeal and clog the deck lines. The Owner then invoiced the Charterers for cleaning expenses and the resulting demurrage incurred by the clogged lines.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Archive / U.S. Maritime Cases

Petro Jamaica v. Griffin Industries, Inc. (The “Petrojam Trader”) – SMA No. 3493, 14 Dec 1998

SHELLTIME 4 -- ARBITRATION -- VOYAGE -- BUNKER -- WEATHER -- ACT OF GOD -- OFF-HIRE -- Charterer Award This arbitration dispute encompasses several key points of contention that arise over the course of the voyage. The arguments include the Vessel’s bunker usage, compensation for Vessel damage resulting from harsh weather at berth, and various claims for off-hire.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.