Category: English Maritime Cases

London Arbitration 5/14

GENCON -- VOYAGE CHARTER -- COST OF SECURITY GUARDS -- DISTINCTION OF BIMCO ISPS CLAUSES -- NATIONALITY OF CREW -- Owner Award This dispute arose under a voyage charter from Turkey to a U.S. port wherein the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (hereinafter CBP) ordered security guards to be posted. Charterer denied liability for the cost of the guards on the basis that the latest BIMCO ISPS clause excuses Charterer from liability when security guards are required due to the nationality of the crew.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

London Arbitration 7/14

NYPE -- TIME CHARTER -- REPUDIATION OF CHARTER -- UNPAID HIRE -- CALCULATION OF DAMAGES -- Owner Award Charterer withheld payment for hire thereby frustrating the charter. Owner considered this a repudiatory breach and withdrew the Vessel from the Charterer’s service.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Caresse Navigation Ltd. v. Office National de L’electricite and Others (The “Channel Ranger”) – QBD (Comm. Ct.), 14 Oct 2013

NYPE -- WHETHER BILL OF LADING INCORPORATED CHARTER PARTY LAW AND JURISDICTION -- Owner Award With respect to a cargo contamination claim, the consignees and the cargo insurers challenge the jurisdiction of the English court and law (stipulated in the charter party) when the cargo contamination occurred at the place of delivery in Morocco.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Flame SA v. Glory Wealth Shipping Pte. Ltd. (The “Glory Wealth”) – QBD (Comm. Ct.), 22 Oct 2013

CONTRACT OF AFFREIGHTMENT -- REPUDIATORY BREACH -- CONTRACT CONSTRUCTION -- DAMAGES -- Owner Award A three-year contract of affreightment (COA) was fixed basis six liftings per year from 2009 to 2011. Charterer failed to declare laycans for the last two shipments of 2009 and for all shipments the following year. At arbitration the Disponent Owner was awarded damages in the form of lost revenues, being the difference between the COA and market rate. Charterer appealed claiming that the Tribunal erred at law and serious irregularity. Namely, that after the sudden collapse of the freight market in 2009 the Owner’s financial position had deteriorated to a point that would have prevented them from being able to provide the required vessels; the tribunal’s belated request for supporting documents from Owner; and, the tribunal’s failure to consider the issue of Owner’s dishonesty raised by Charterer.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

DS-Rendite-Fonds Nr 106 VLCC Titan Glory GmbH & Co Tankschiff KG and Others v. Titan Maritime SA and Others (The “Titan Glory”) – QBD (Comm. Ct.), 13 Nov 2013

LONG-TERM PERIOD TIME CHARTERS -- CHARTER RESTRUCTURING AGREEMENT (CRA) -- SEMI-ANNUAL HIRE ADJUSTMENT -- CONTRACT CONSTRUCTION -- Owner Award Due to the financial challenges brought on by the market collapse of 2008/9, Owner and Charterer restructured the long-term period time charters for eight VLCCs. Under this new agreement, the hire would be derived on a month-to-month basis relative to the Clarkson Index and adjusted semi-annually. Disagreements arose with respect to the proper construction of the contract and interpretation of the semi-annual adjustment clause.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

ED&F Man Sugar Ltd. v Unicargo Transportgesellschaft mBh (The “Ladytramp”) – English Court of Appeal, 19 Nov 2013

SUGAR CHARTER PARTY 1999 -- FIRE DAMAGE AT TERMINAL -- MECHANICAL BREAKDOWN DEFINED -- OBLIGATION TO NOMINATE ALTERNATE BERTH -- FORCE MAJEURE -- GOVERNMENT INTERFERENCE -- Owner Award The Vessel was delayed in berthing due to a fire that had destroyed the conveyor belt system at the Charterer’s regularly-scheduled terminal. Charterer submitted their case to the Court of Appeal for consideration that this situation should constitute a mechanical breakdown and likewise exempted from the Owner’s laytime calculation.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Venetico Marine SA v. International General Insurance Co. Ltd. and Others (The “Irene EM”) – QBD (Comm. Ct.), 27 Nov 2013

GROUNDING -- PERIL OF SEAS OR NEGLIGENCE OF CREW -- MARINE INSURANCE -- MEASURE OF DAMAGES -- Owner Award The Vessel grounded while she was at anchorage awaiting berth and the insurance underwriters refused to compensate the Owner. The underwriters argued that the Owner had not proven how the grounding occurred. In ruling for the Owner, the Panel held that whether the grounding was due to peril of the seas or negligence of the crew, either was sufficient for insurance compensation.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

London Arbitration 12/13

TIME CHARTER -- REPUDIATION OF CONTRACT BY CHARTERER -- MEASURE OF DAMAGES WHEN NO SIMILAR MARKET EXISTS -- Owner Award After non-payment of hire for 10 consecutive months, Owner withdrew the Vessel and sought restitution from the Guarantor of Charterer’s liabilities for the unpaid hire up to the point the time charter contract was deemed repudiated, damages for the unexpired period remaining, and restitution for bunker costs.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Kingsway Shipping Co. Ltd. v. STX Gulf Shipping DMCCO – QBD (Comm. Ct.), 28 May 2013

TIME CHARTER -- GROUNDING DUE EXCESS DRAFT RESULTING FROM SUB-CHARTERER’S LOAD INSTRUCTIONS -- Charterer Award Under a chain of time charters, the Vessel grounded and damaged her hull as a result of following the sub-Charterer’s load instructions to a draft of 13.3m. The Head Owner’s claim for indemnity failed because the sub-Charterer’s indemnity guarantee was given to the Master as the representative of the intermediate Charterer (not as a representative of the Head Owner) and the indemnity was not provided on a back-to-back basis throughout the chain.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Beijing Jianlong Heavy Industry Group v. Golden Ocean Group Ltd. and Others – QBD (Comm. Ct.), 1 May 2013

TIME CHARTER -- ENFORCEABILITY OF ENGLISH ARBITRATION IN CONTRACT CONTAINING AN ILLEGAL GUARANTEE -- NON-COMPLIANCE WITH CHINESE "SAFE" (STATE ADMINISTRATION FOR FOREIGN EXCHANGE) REGISTRATION -- Owner Award The background to this case involved five claims pursued by various ship owners against Beijing Jianlong Heavy Industry Group (hereinafter "Charterer") against the Charterer’s guarantor to resolve essentially the same issue i.e. Charterer’s repudiation of its obligations under several time charter contracts. Due to the similarities, the dispute was consolidated at London arbitration.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.