2025 Maritime Digest of Arbitration Awards and Court Rulings
BPVOY 3 -- VESSEL DETAINED -- RESTRAINT OF PRINCES -- DEMURRAGE LIABILITY -- FORCE MAJEURE -- Partial Owner Award and FOB Seller Award
Loading operations began without the presence of the required local government representative. The government subsequently revoked the Vessel’s clearance and refused to deliver the Vessel’s departure documents until the Terminal Operator paid a "fine" for her release. Owner claimed demurrage, costs for bunker and water consumption, and additional war insurance premiums. Charterer submitted a 3rd party demurrage liability claim against their FOB Seller.
SUGAR CHARTER PARTY 1999 -- CONTRACT CONSTRUCTION -- FIRE CAUSING TERMINAL BREAKDOWN -- OBLIGATION TO NOMINATE ALTERNATE BERTH -- GOVERNMENT INTERFERENCE DEFINED -- Owner Award
Prior to the Vessel’s arrival at the load berth, a fire destroyed the terminal’s conveyor-belt system and the Vessel was forced to lie at anchorage and await Charterer’s instructions. Owner charged this delay as laytime, however Charterer argued that the inoperable conveyor-belt system should be considered a mechanical breakdown and therefore not count.
BPVOY 4 -- REASONABLE OVERAGE FREIGHT -- EXCESS FREIGHT PAID -- RECOVERY OF OVERPAYMENT -- MISTAKE AT LAW -- Partial Charterer Award
Charterer sought to recover a million dollars of excess freight paid on the Owner’s purportedly miscalculated invoice. At issue is whether freight overage applies for cargo carried in excess of the minimum volume stipulated when the additional port/region was not named in the Overage Section of the contract; and, whether the difference between the amount paid and the correct amount is recoverable at law as a payment made under a mistake.
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.
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.
NYPE -- TIME CHARTER -- PREMATURE REDELIVERY -- REPUDIATORY BREACH -- Owner Award
Under a time charter contract, the Charterer redelivered the Vessel early and the Owner refused to accept the repudiatory breach in an attempt to affirm the charter party rather than the usual course of action in re-fixing and then claiming damages.
LETTER OF INDEMNITY – WRONGFUL DELIVERY – Owner Award
In upholding the Commercial Court’s ruling of 27 May 2011 (background details previously recapped in The TANKVOYager, Vol. 18, No. 1), the Court of Appeal held that the Owners are protected under an LOI issued by the Receivers to the Charterers. Despite the Owner being unaware of the LOI, the Owner was protected by it on the basis that the Owner was acting as the Charterer’s agents when delivering the cargo. The Appellate Court held that "delivery" is a legal concept that does not mean “discharge” and that the Owner need not physically hand over the cargo to the Receiver; rather Owner’s obligation was fulfilled by surrendering possession and power relating to the cargo when delivering to the port authority. With regard to the public policy argument in the Receiver’s attempt to preclude Owner’s protection under the LOI, the court held that the Owner was incapable of a deliberate wrongdoing as the Owner was unaware of a dispute between the sellers and the intermediate buyer; furthermore, this was deemed a commercial dispute (not a public policy issue).
SHELLTIME 4 -- BUNKERS ON REDELIVERY -- MEANING OF “PRICE ACTUALLY PAID” -- CHARTER CONSTRUCTION -- Owner Award
The Vessel was sub-chartered by the Charterer back to the Head Owner for a time period constituting the remainder of the head charter. Vessel redelivery would thereby take place simultaneously under the sub-charter and head charter, however, the proper bunker prices that each party was liable for at redelivery was up for contention.
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.
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.
