Category: English Maritime Cases
SHELLTIME 3 -- TIME CHARTER -- UNPAID HIRE -- WITHDRAWAL OF VESSEL -- SECURITY -- BUNKERS -- Owner Award
In partially overturning the Appellate Court ruling of 6 July 2010 (recapped in The TANKVOYager Vol. 12, No. 4), which in turn had overturned the Commercial Court ruling of 23 July 2009 (recapped in The TANKVOYager Vol. 15, No. 4) the Supreme Court addressed the issue of time lost discharging Charterer’s cargo after Owner’s termination of the contract necessitated by Charterer’s non-payment of hire. The Supreme Court discussed the concepts of bailment and indemnity.
SHELLTIME 4 -- TIME CHARTER -- CHARTER BREACH -- CANCELLATION -- CARGO TANK DEFINITION -- Owner Award
Charterer deducted hire basis a crack in the slop tank necessitating repairs and causing their sub-charterer to cancel a voyage charter. Owner contends that the time charter clause governing tank suitability is restricted to cargo tanks, pumps, and lines, and therefore, does not include the Vessel’s slop tanks.
EXXONVOY 84 -- CONTRACT OF SALE -- DEMURRAGE -- INDEMNITY -- CAUSE OF ACTION -- TIME BAR -- Buyer Award
The relationship between demurrage clauses in the sale contract, underlying charter party, and the relevant commercial background determines what constitutes the accrual of the cause of action for Seller’s claim against the Buyer. The issue that the contract was finalized after the completion of discharge is broached.
NYPE -- TIME-CHARTER -- RISK OF PIRACY -- CONWARTIME 1993 --GULF OF ADEN -- ALLEGED DEVIATION AROUND CAPE OF GOOD HOPE -- Charterer Award
Due to the inherent risk of piracy along the contracted route, the Owner instructed the Vessel to change course incurring additional costs for Charterer’s account. The arbitrators held that the Owner acted appropriately. On appeal the Court ruled that the arbitration panel had deconstructed the CONWARTIME 1993 clause improperly and, as such, remanded the case back to the arbitrators for reconsideration on findings of fact.
SHELLTIME 3 -- TIME CHARTER -- SPEED WARRANTY -- PERFORMANCE CLAUSE -- UNDERPERFORMANCE -- BUNKER CONSUMPTION -- ALL WEATHER WARRANTY -- Charterer Award
The sub-charterer contends that the time-chartered vessel did not meet the contracted requirements for speed and fuel performance basis the construction of the relevant clauses. Such construction is based on the inclusion of an all weather warranty, which the owners claim is not proper in the context of this time-charter.
GENCON -- ECONOMIC DURESS -- REPUDIATORY BREACH OF CONTRACT -- VESSEL SUBSTITUTION -- Charterer Award
Although Owner’s action of substituting the contracted vessel without notifying the Charterer created a repudiatory breach, the Charterer did not cancel the charter. Owner proposed a new vessel and promised to reimburse the Charterer for damages, however they later used economic leverage to gain a better deal during renegotiation.
WORLDSCALE -- PORT EXPENSES -- AMOCO CLAIMS CLAUSE -- TIME BAR -- Charterer Award
When Charterer directed the Vessel to a port which did not have an established Worldscale (WS) rate, Charterer advised Owner that port expenses would be for Charterer's account. When Owner's claim for port expenses arrived 155 days after discharge, Charterer rejected the claim stating it was barred under the Amoco Claims Clause.
BALTIME 1939 -- NON-PAYMENT OF HIRE AND BUNKERS -- REPUDIATORY BREACH -- QUANTUM MERUIT FOR COMPLETION OF VOYAGE -- Owner Award
When Charterer failed to pay three installments of hire, other expenses and arrange and pay for bunkers under a time charter contract, Owner first informed Charterer that they were suspending performance of the charter until outstanding hire was paid and then three days later, informed Charterer that they accepted Charterer's repudiatory breach. At the time of the repudiatory breach the Vessel was at sea en-route to the disport and in fact Vessel continued on to the disport and discharged Charterer's cargo.
BALTIME 1939 -- VESSEL BREAKDOWN -- WRONGFUL TERMINATION -- REPUDIATORY BREACH -- DAMAGES -- Owner Award
When Charterer emailed Owner that Owner had committed breaches of two time charter parties amounting to repudiations and that the two charter parties were terminated, Owner responded by stating Charterer's email was itself a repudiatory breach and that the charter parties were thusly terminated. Owner claimed damages in the form of lost profits due to early redelivery, unpaid hire and fees, detention at the disport and the cost incurred when containers were left on board one of the vessels at redelivery.
GAFTA FORM 120 -- FOB SALE -- INSUFFICIENT ETA NOTICE -- REPUDIATORY BREACH -- Buyer Award
When the FOB Buyer failed to nominate the vessel at least 7 working days prior to vessel's ETA, Seller rejected the nomination. Despite non-conformity with the contract’s ETA requirement, this was not a sufficient basis for Seller to repudiate the contract.
