Category: U.S. Maritime Cases
ASBATANKVOY -- DEMURRAGE -- ARBITRATION -- PRORATE -- INCREASED DEMURRAGE INVOICE -- Owner Award
In order to collect outstanding demurrage claims, the Owner started arbitration; however, originally, the claim was erroneously calculated with a lower prorated waiting time which the Owner raised at arbitration. The Charterers argued that they were exempt from this new rate because they believed it to be punitive and an alteration of the original contract.
PORT AUTHORITY -- BERTH -- DEMURRAGE -- DETENTION -- BERTH CLOSURE -- Owner Award
After repeatedly delaying its ETA, the Vessel ultimately arrived, but the port authority had closed the berth for scheduled maintenance. In response to the subsequent Owner demurrage claim, the Charterer counterclaimed that neither the maintenance nor the delays leading to the prolonged ETA were in His/Her control.
ASBATANKVOY -- LOADPORT -- CHARTER PARTY -- BERTH -- CARGO -- DEMURRAGE -- ARBITRATION -- TANK CLEANLINESS -- Charterer Award
Upon arriving at loadport after a new cargo revision in the Charter Party, the Vessel was kicked off of berth because of survey results revealing that the Vessel’s tanks were insufficiently cleaned for the revised cargo. The Owner submitted demurrage for the cleaning costs and delays arguing that the tanks were acceptable for the original cargo.
ASBATANKVOY -- CHARTER PARTY -- DEMURRAGE -- TERMINAL LOGS -- TIME-BAR -- Charterer Award
This case’s Charter Party clearly stipulates that there are no grounds for demurrage unless the claim (along with supporting documentation) is received within ninety days of cargo discharge. So when the Owner submitted a claim on the ninetieth day without the specifically outlined terminal logs, the Charterer deemed the demurrage time-barred by the Charter Party.
CONTRACT OF AFFREIGHTMENT -- BERTH -- DISPORT -- DREDGE PIPE -- CHANNEL -- GROUNDING -- ARBITRATION -- UNSAFE BERTH -- Charterer Award
While moving to berth at disport, the Vessel ran aground on an abandoned dredge pipe in the navigation channel. The Owner followed suit with an arbitration charge for the damages sustained in the grounding, claiming that the Charterer had breached the safe berth warranty. The Charterer counterclaimed that the Owner faulted the grounding citing the Owner’s frequent usage of the port in the past as well as the lack of prior Owner proof that the berth was unsafe.
NORGRAIN 89 -- CHARTER PARTY -- GOVERNMENT CURFEW -- CARGO -- DEMURRAGE -- BERTH -- DISPORT -- Owner Award
The Charter Party specifically stated that if cargo cannot be discharged because of "Civil Commotions," then there cannot be any demurrage claim for lost time. But, when the Vessel berthed at disport and a national curfew was in place, the Owner filed for demurrage regardless arguing that the curfew did not prevent the cargo from being discharged, but instead the subsequent lack of trucks leaving the port was the root cause of detainment.
ASBATANKVOY -- ARBITRATION -- PUMP WARRANTY -- MANIFOLD -- DEMURRAGE -- LATE PAYMENT -- PUMP WARRANTY -- Owner Award
This arbitration centers around the finer aspects of the pump warranty. In this case, the Charterers argue that the agreed pressure at the Vessel’s manifold was not maintained throughout the unloading. The Owners, on the other hand, stipulate that the referenced pressure drops were at the beginning and end of discharge, a common safety and loss prevention practice.
SALES CONTRACT -- SHIPPING -- DEMURRAGE -- ARBITRATION -- DETENTION -- PORT -- CARGO -- VETTING -- Buyer Award
The Buyer preliminarily contacted the Seller to ask if the Vessel characteristics agreed with Seller requirements for shipping. After granting approval, the Seller allegedly sent documents stipulating that the agreement was conditional on whether the Vessel had an operating VR system. However, the Buyer never received such stipulations and submitted demurrage for delays at port when the Seller refused Vessel loading without VR.
BALTIMORE GRAIN CP -- DISPORT -- BERTH -- ARBITRATION -- LAYTIME -- PORT -- Partial Owner Award
Although blocked by disport by seventeen miles of ice, the Vessel tendered NOR and awaited icebreaker assistance for five days before continuing to berth. At arbitration, the Owners view the NOR as a valid beginning of laytime and any further delays at port were the fault of the Charterers. The Charterers counterclaimed that an NOR tendered seventeen miles from port limits cannot be considered valid.
ASBATANKVOY -- DEMURRAGE -- ARBITRATION -- TIME-BAR -- BARGE -- DISPORT -- CLAIM -- Owner Award
In this case, there were four separate demurrage issues under dispute. Arbitration disputes focused on the time-bar clause, the allocation of time spent overloading the Vessel and subsequent reloading, delays waiting for the Charterer’s barge at disport, and the Owner’s right to increase a claim.
