Category: U.S. Maritime Cases
ASBATANKVOY --PORT -- DISPORT -- TERMINAL -- DRAFT -- BERTH -- DEMURRAGE -- LIGHTERING -- BARGE -- Owner Award
Upon arrival at the Charterer’s nominated port, the Vessel was loaded beyond the disport terminal’s published draft. So because the berth was unreachable upon arrival, the Owner subsequently submitted a demurrage claim for the time spent awaiting the Charterer’s lightering barges. The Charterer, however, cited other instances where vessels with greater drafts had berthed safely at the terminal.
ASBATANKVOY -- ARBITRATION -- VOYAGE -- LAYTIME -- QUARANTINE -- CUSTOMS -- BERTH -- PORT -- Owner Award
The arbitration proceedings encompass several points of contention during the voyage. Laytime disputes include laytime deductions for tank cleaning, laytime during quarantine and customs clearance, and daylight restrictions for berthing at port.
Although the charter party stipulated that the Vessel take necessary measures to arrive on time, the Vessel was delayed at loadport due to a congested berth and arrived to disport on demurrage. Afterwards, the Owners filed a demurrage claim for the voyage, but neglected to include the required heating log. The Charterers argued that the missing heating log and an alleged failure to meet voyage provisions for arrival illegitimizes the claim.
After an initial tank failure and a subsequent cleaning, the Vessel's tanks were approved by the Charterer's inspector. But upon further samples taken, the inspector retracted his approval and rejected the tanks because of high water content in the loaded cargo. The Charterer requested that the Vessel sail without the loading balance of cargo and the Owners submitted a claim for demurrage and wrongful cancellation.
The Owner counts the time spent between hoses off and the barges' departure as laytime because the Vessel was restrained from moving.
The Charterer's nominated berth was occupied upon the Vessel's arrival and 4H after tendering NOR, the Port Authority closed the channel due to fog and thereby prohibiting the berthed vessel to leave. The Owner argued that the Charterer had breached the Charter Party clause stipulating a berth reachable upon arrival and claimed the delays as laytime.
The Owner's Pilot gave the Master erroneous information stating that the Vessel was unable to berth due to the channel's restrictive width. Upon further investigation, the Master deemed the Vessel capable of proceeding from anchorage and the Owner subsequently claimed these delays as demurrage.
When the cast iron Vessel arrived at loadport, the loading terminal prohibited its berthing basis the Vessel's poor condition and non-stainless steel manifold. So the Vessel was forced to load at anchorage by barge, thereby putting the Vessel on demurrage. And upon Vessel arrival at disport, the inspection revealed that the cargo was off-color for which the despondent receivers arrested the Vessel.
The Owners began arbitration to recover losses incurred by two separate instances of demurrage over the course of the Vessel"'"s chartered voyage. At loadport, the Vessel was forced to wait an additional four days to berth, and upon berthing, failed tank inspection and had to be cleaned for an extra six days. And at disport, daytime-restricted unloading to trucks caused further delays for the Vessel.
