Category: U.S. Maritime Cases

Great Elephant Corp. v. CPC Corp. (The “Front Sabang”) – SMA No. 4197, 14 Dec 2012

ASBA II -- GANGWAY FAILURE -- SEAWORTHINESS --BAD WEATHER -- DEMURRAGE -- Partial Owner Award The gangway collapsed during the boarding of the Charterer’s mooring team causing injury and subsequent delays in berthing. Per Owner, the cause of the collapse was due to a sheared swivel pin from contact by the tug in adverse weather. Conversely, Charterer asserted that the condition of the swivel pin was pre-existing and combined with the weight of the team caused the failure.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

America Metals Trading, LLP v. Phoenix Bulk Carriers, Ltd. (The “Captain P. Egglezos”) – SMA No. 4201, 25 Feb 2013

GENCON -- CONDITION OF PERFORMANCE -- ADDITIONAL FREIGHT FOR REPLACEMENT VESSELS -- Owner Award Charterer seeks compensation for the freight differential paid on substitute tonnage when the Owner failed to perform in their obligation to nominate two vessels as required in the charter party. Conversely, Owner counters that due to cargo issues (railcar allocation, export documentation, etc.) and berth operational issues, the Charterer would not have been able to supply the cargo even if the Owner complied with the Vessel nominations.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Odfjell Tankers AS v. Colonial Oil Industries Inc. (The “Kiso”) – SMA No. 4187, 5 Oct 2012

ASBATANKVOY -- EXTENSION OF LAYDAYS -- DEMURRAGE -- NO RESPONSE FROM CHARTERER -- FAILURE TO NOMINATE ARBITRATOR -- Owner Award Charterer agreed to a laycan extension when it became clear that the Vessel would be unable to reach the loadport by the cancellation date. After the voyage, Owner submitted a claim for demurrage and Charterer disputed their calculation. Charterer did not respond to any further communication.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Phoenix Bulk Carriers, Ltd. v. America Metals Trading, LLP. (The “Captain P. Egglezos”) – SMA No. 4164, 9 Feb 2012

GENCON -- DEMURRAGE RATE -- FORCE MAJEURE -- REVERSIBLE LAYTIME -- CHARTER CONSTRUCTION -- Owner Award At issue is whether the charter party allowed for reversible laytime due to the deletion of the ‘Non-Reversible’ Laytime Clause in a prior charter incorporated basis "logical alterations". Also, Charterer claimed that Force Majeure was in effect at disport due to prior Hurricanes Gustav and Ike which allegedly caused delays in procuring barges.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Caribe Tankers, Ltd. v. Petroleo Brasileiro, SA (The “Negotiator”) – SMA No. 4165, 17 Feb 2012

SHELLVOY 6 -- DEMURRAGE -- DOCUMENT SIGNATURE -- FAILURE TO ISSUE LETTER OF PROTEST -- Charterer Award After the Vessel loaded her cargo, the terminal representative refused to sign the Statement of Facts. When Owner submitted their demurrage claim after the voyage, the Charterer refuted it on the grounds that the missing signature invalidates the relevant loadport demurrage on the basis that Owner failed to issue a requisite Letter of Protest (LOP).
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Hess Corp. v. Leo Tanker Corp. (The “Atlantic Leo”) – SMA No. 4181, 31 Jul 2012

ASBATANKVOY -- CARGO CONTAMINATION -- TANK SEGREGATION -- COGSA -- MITIGATION -- COMMERCIAL DAMAGES -- Partial Charterer Award Upon loading the Charterer’s two parcels of premium and regular gasoline, some of the premium was found to be below the Buyer’s required octane rating due to an apparent commingling of the two parcels. The Charterer mitigated their losses by deviating to an additional disport and discharging the unacceptable cargo there to be sold as regular. Charterer claims that the contamination took place on board the Vessel and that they were owed the difference between the Buyer’s price for premium and an average sampling of bulk regular pricing as proper mitigation.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Team Tankers v. Noble Americas Corp. (The “Team Jupiter”) – SMA No. 4183, 31 Aug 2012

ASBATANKVOY -- VESSEL COLLISION AND DECEPTIVE HANDLING -- DEADFREIGHT -- VETTING REJECTION -- COMMERCIAL DAMAGES -- Charterer Award Without Charterer’s knowledge, the Vessel had suffered class-affecting damages while operating under a prior charter. As a result, the Vessel was rejected at discharge port by the Receiver’s vetting group and the Charterer was forced to make a distress sale at severe losses. Owner commenced arbitration proceedings to collect deadfreight and demurrage; Charterer counterclaimed for commercial losses.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Euroceanica (UK) Ltd. v. Crystal Amaranto and Tricon Shipping Inc. (The “Crystal Amaranto”) – SMA No. 4186, 21 Sep 2012

CRYSTAL AMARANTO -- ASBATANKVOY -- COMMERCIAL DAMAGES -- MASTER'S ROLE -- CONTAMINATION -- CAUSTIC SODA -- FREE MARINE LIMITED -- UNCLEAN BILLS OF LADING -- Owner Award While loading Charterer’s cargo, the Master noticed signs of potential contamination. Surveyors would later support his findings however they could not ascertain the nature or source of the problem. The Master chose to clause the Bills of Lading to reflect the findings which caused a loss of sale to the Charterer. Owner brought arbitration to recover demurrage for lost time testing the cargo and the Charterer counterclaimed for commercial losses.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Clipper Bulk Shipping BV v. Korea Line Corp. and Grieg Star Shipping AS and Atlas Shipiing AS (The “Fomalhaut”) – SMA No. 4145, 24 Oct 2011

NYPE -- TIME-CHARTER -- OFF-SPEC BUNKERS -- BUNKER CONSUMPTION PRIOR TO ANALYSIS -- DAMAGES -- SPEED AND CONSUMPTION -- Partial Owner Award Off-spec bunkers were provided by Charterer yet prior to the sample analysis being received Vessel consumed some of the off-spec bunkers damaging the engines. Owner subsequently claimed for the cost of repairs, the cost to replace the bunkers, and the cost of cleaning of the tanks the off-spec bunkers were stored in. This arbitration also covered eight issues regarding the speed and consumption warranties.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Sherwin Alumina, L.P. v. Western Bulk Carriers KS – SMA No. 4148, 30 Nov 2011

CONTRACT OF AFFREIGHTMENT (COA) -- ISPS CODE -- LIABILITY FOR PORT EXPENSES -- DOCKAGE AND SECURITY FEES -- Owner Award Midway through an eight-year fixed freight rate Contract of Affreightment (COA), Charterer's new port manager directed Charterer to pass on port fees to Owner given the COA states Owner is responsible for "all port expenses". Fees were previously not being passed on presumably due to Charterer's lack of experience in this area.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.