Category: English Maritime Cases
GENCON -- VESSEL DAMAGED WHILE BERTHING -- MULTIPLE BERTH CALLS IN PORT -- SAFE BERTH WARRANTY -- Charterer Award
If a specific port is named in a voyage charterparty and there are several possible berths within that port to which a vessel could be directed and there is no express "safety" warranty of either the port or the berth, is the charterparty subject to an implied term that the Charterers must nominate a “safe” berth?
MEANING OF "ACCEPT / EXCEPT" -- TIME-BAR -- CALCULATION ERROR -- UNILATERAL MISTAKE -- Seller Award
If a demurrage claim is paid, and later discovered to have contained an error, is there an obligation to pay the additional amount, even if the time bar has long since passed? When negotiating a contract, what is the meaning of the phrase "accept/except"?
ASBATANKVOY -- SAFE PORT WARRANTY -- INABILITY TO PROVIDE FULL CARGO DUE TO SILTING -- DEADFREIGHT -- Owner Award
In this dispute, the Panel was called upon to determine the Charterer's liability following their failure to provide the minimum amount of cargo stated in the charter party due to draft restrictions caused by silting. The Panel explains what other options the Charterer could have exercised other than simply loading less cargo to the Vessel.
NYPE -- LATE REDELIVERY -- WHETHER SUBSEQUENT LOST PROFITS WERE FORSEEABLE -- DAMAGES UNDER SUBSEQUENT FIXTURE -- Charterer Award
Following the late redelivery of the Vessel from a time charter, Owners were forced to renegotiate their next time charter at a lower rate. Owners claimed $1.3 million in damages and won the dispute. On this appeal by Charterers, the Panel overturned the previous ruling with the simple question "Would an objective person have anticipated such a large loss of profits from the redelivery of a time chartered vessel made nine days late?" The award details the Panel's ruling and settlement.
SHELLTIME 4 -- VESSEL FITNESS FOR SERVICE WHEN REGULATIONS RESTRICTING CARGOES CHANGE -- MARPOL -- SEAWORTHINESS -- Charterer Award
Two vessels were contracted for the carriage of fuel oils, but following the fixture, MARPOL regulations were changed, requiring fuel oil to be carried only in double-hulled ships. The Court of Appeal upheld the High Court's decision, and described what changes could have been made to the two vessels to bring them in compliance with the new MARPOL regulations.
ASBATANKVOY -- RESPONSIBILITY FOR "PIER DUES" -- CONFLICTING CLAUSES -- AMENDMENTS -- Charterer Award
Although this award focuses on the responsibility for paying pier dues, it is relevant to laytime and demurrage in that the charter party contains two clauses which are in conflict. The Panel determines which clause takes precedence, and explains why.
STEMMOR -- ACCEPTANCE OF NOR -- REVERSIBLE LAYTIME -- TIME COUNTING DURING BUNKERING -- Owner Award
The Panel is asked to rule on a variety of topics, including whether or not the failure to reject a NOR means that it is inherently accepted, the nature of "reversible" laytime and how laytime should be calculated for separate parcels, and whether time spent bunkering while waiting for an available berth counts as laytime.
GENCON -- DEMURRAGE -- WHETHER BERTH OR PORT CHARTER -- NIGHT TRANSIT -- GROUNDING -- AWAITING PILOT -- SHIFT TO BERTH -- Owner Award
This award covered a number of issues, including whether the fixture of "one safe berth" and a WIBON (whether in berth or not) constituted a berth charter party, whether or not port restrictions on night transits are demurrage events, and how a pilot shortage affected the Panel's ruling on waiting time and a grounding incident.
NYPE -- TIME CHARTER TRIP -- SUBSTANTIAL DELAYS AT DISPORT -- IMPLIED TERM TO DISCHARGE WITHIN REASONABLE TIME -- OWNERS’ CLAIM FOR FINANCIAL LOSS -- Charterer Award
Under a NYPE form time charter, the Vessel delivered cargo to Lagos, but wasn't given berthing instructions for nine months. Owners commenced arbitration to recover lost profits from the delay in redelivering the Vessel. How did the Panel define "reasonable time" under a NYPE charter party? This Panel's ruling lays out what happens when parties don't include protective clauses with specific wording in their contracts.
VEGOILVOY -- SUBSTANTIAL FAILURE OF EPOXY COATING OF CARGO TANKS -- TANK LINING -- VESSEL SUITABILITY -- WHETHER OWNERS IN BREACH OF CHARTER -- Charterer Award
The Charterer's inspector rejected the Vessel's tanks due to severe corrosion and rust, and declared the Vessel unsuitable. Charterer held the Owner in breach of the charter not only for the condition of the tanks, but also if the Vessel's tanks were actually epoxy coated as presented in the charter party. Charterer won the initial dispute in the Court of Singapore. Owners appealed, and this award details how the Court approached the issue.
