Category: English Maritime Cases
DEMURRAGE – DETENTION – TIME BAR – NOTICE OF READINESS Vessel was requested to wait in gulf outside discharge port due to a lack of berthing prospects. Owner invoiced detention inclusive of extra bunkers consumed from CFR seller whom in turn claimed it from the CFR buyer. The CFR time-barred the claim via the demurrage time bar clause. [dropcap]G[/dropcap]lencore Energy UK Ltd (hereinafter, “Glencore”) sold 80,000 mt of light crude oil CFR to OMV Supply and Trading Ltd (hereinafter, “OMV”) to be loaded at Novorossiysk, Russia and carried by a vessel that was to be nominated to the discharge port...
VOYAGE CHARTER PARTY – SHELLVOY 5 – OBLIGATION TO COMMENCE VOYAGE – LAYCAN EQUIVALENT TO EXPECTED TIME OF ARRIVAL / EXPECTED READINESS TO LOAD – EXPECTED TIME OF ARRIVAL – EXPECTED READINESS TO LOAD – MONROE OBLIGATION Charterer claimed damages against Owner when Vessel was unable to proceed to loading port by the charter party cancellation date. It argued the Owner had absolute obligation to proceed to the loading port where the cancellation date constituted the time in which the approach voyage was to be commenced. [dropcap]T[/dropcap]he vessel “Pacific Voyager” (hereinafter, “Vessel’) was chartered by CSSA Chartering and Shipping Services...
REPUDIATORY BREACH – CHARTER PARTY – EXISTENCE OF A COMPLETED CONTRACT – PRO FORMA CHARTER PARTY – COURT OF APPEAL The claimant charterer filed damages against defendant disponent owner for repudiatory breach of a charter party. The defendant argued that the presence of a Subject Review clause implied no formal contract existed. [dropcap]T[/dropcap]optip Holding Pte Ltd (hereinafter, “Toptip”) as charterer claimed damages against Mercuria Energy Trading Pte Ltd (hereinafter, “Mercuria”) as disponent owner for repudiatory breach of a charter party. Toptip claimed for the difference in freight rate between the charter party with Mercuria and the substitute charter party. The...
SALE OF GOODS (CFR) - DEMURRAGE - TIMELY PAYMENT OF FREIGHT - OBLIGATIONS UNDER SALES CONTRACT VS UNDER CHARTERPARTY - OWNERS REFUSING TO RELEASE BILLS OF LADING UNTIL FREIGHT PAYMENT
The CFR Sellers brought arbitration against their Buyers in order to indemnify themselves for demurrage caused by the Buyers delaying payment of the Owner’s freight. Sellers argued that it was the Buyer’s responsibility to pay freight promptly under the contract. The Buyers countered that the obligation to pay freight accrued under the Seller’s charterparty, and therefore it was the Seller’s responsibility.
VOYAGE CHARTER - DEMURRAGE – TIME BAR – VALID NOTICE OF READINESS – FAILURE TO PROVIDE CARGO
Charterer cancelled a voyage charter party after failing to provide cargo. Owner claimed demurrage and damages from the alleged repudiatory breach. Charterer countered that the claim was time barred, the Vessel’s NOR was invalid, and the damages if awarded, should be basis the C/P’s lowest freight option.
TIME CHARTER - VESSEL’S CONDITION UPON REDELIVERY - BREACH OF CHARTER
When Charterer sat the Vessel at an equatorial port for 35 days, the Owner claimed underperformance damages incurred under a subsequent fixture and the cost to clean the hull.
DEMURRAGE - OIL SPILL - FORCE MAJEURE - PROCEED THERETO - REACHABLE ON ARRIVAL - ARREST OR RESTRAINT OF PRINCES - BPVOY3
Before the vessel’s arrival at port, a vessel at the vessel’s intended berth had an oil spill which delayed the vessel once she arrived at the port. Charterer argued to split the delay 50/50 wherein owner stated that BPVOY3’s “proceed thereto” was to be read as “reachable on arrival”, the spill was not an exception, and the prior vessel’s arrest was not an “arrest or restraint of princes, rulers or people”.
DEMURRAGE - TIME BAR - ALL SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS - PRIMA FACIE - ASBATANKVOY
When owner’s claim for demurrage did not include all supporting documents, charterer time barred it.
ENGINE BREAKDOWN - TYPHOON - SEAWORTHINESS - GENERAL AVERAGE - REASONABLE EXPENDITURES
After suffering an engine breakdown, the shipowner employed a tug to avoid a typhoon and to bring the vessel to port. The owner then brought claim against the insurance company for general average contribution. The defendant argued that the vessel was unseaworthy at the beginning of the voyage and that the casualty was caused by actionable fault of the Owner and thus no contribution was due. Further, the defendant argued that owner’s expenditure as claimed under general average was unreasonable.
NYPE - NON PAYMENT OF HIRE - PREMATURE WITHDRAWAL BY OWNER - REPUDIATORY BREACH - BALANCE OF HIRE - ADDITIONAL HIRE
After charterer missed making hire payments, the owner informed charterer of its “rights” under the C/P. When no payments were made by the 3rd day after its notice, owner withdrew the vessel. Charterer pointed to a clause in the C/P requiring owner give “3 clear banking days notice” prior to withdrawal. Charterer claimed the balance of hire and owner claimed additional hire.
