2025 Maritime Digest of Arbitration Awards and Court Rulings

Westport Petroleum Inc. v. Kythrea Shipping Co. Ltd. (The “LMZ Artemis”) – SMA No. 4144, 2 Sep 2011

ASBATANKVOY -- CARGO CONTAMINATION -- DELAYED DISCHARGE DUE HIGH HYDROGEN SULFIDE (H2S) VAPORS -- COGSA -- HEATING AND PURGING COSTS -- LOST PROFITS ON MISSED VOYAGE -- Partial Owner Award When a prior cargo apparently contaminated Charterer’s cargo, Charterer claimed for the cost needed to decontaminate it. Owner in turn denied Charterer’s claim and claimed demurrage incurred whilst Charterer was treating the cargo, heating and purging costs and lost profits when a subsequent fixture was cancelled as a result of the delayed discharge.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Precious Stars Ltd. v. Helena Chartering Inc. and STX Pan Ocean Co. Ltd. (The “Suchada Naree”) – SMA No. 4143, 29 Aug 2011

NYPE 93 -- OFF-HIRE -- EARLY REDELIVERY AND BUNKER LIABILITY -- MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES -- Partial Owner Award This arbitration dealt with a number of issues under a time charter. Namely, when does hire resume after an off-hire period for drydocking, early redelivery by Charterer, responsibility for bunkers consumed after early redelivery, an alleged off-hire period whilst the Vessel’s cranes were inoperable and finally, the distribution of numerous charges incurred during the time charter.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Gretchen Shipping Inc. v. Commodities & Minerals Enterprises, Ltd. (The “Christoffer Oldendorf” renamed “General Piar”) – SMA No. 4140, 16 Aug 2011

BALTIME 1939 -- MASTER OVERWRITING FIGURES ON DEPARTURE DOCUMENTS -- DEPARTURE DELAY WHILE AGENT PREPARES NEW DOCUMENTS -- OFF-HIRE -- Charterer Award Upon completion of loading Master first refused to sign required departure documents before striking through figures and writing in what he considered to be the correct amounts. There was subsequently a 24-hour delay whilst new documents were prepared which the Master signed as presented with his disagreements noted on the bottom. Against Owner’s wishes, Charterer subsequently deducted the 24-hour period from money owed for bunkers.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Citgo Petroleum Corp. v. Pulot Enterprises, Inc. (The “Stinice”) – SMA No. 4139, 5 Aug 2011

ASBATANKVOY -- CLAUSE PARAMOUNT -- COGSA -- CARGO CONTAMINATION -- Charterer Award When cargo was found to be contaminated onboard the vessel at the discharge port, Charterer argued that COGSA applied and subsequently attempted to show that the cargo was loaded onboard the Vessel in good condition and discharged in a damaged condition.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Seaarland Shipping Management BV v. Standard Tankers Bahamas Ltd. (The “Elisewin”) – SMA No. 4137, 21 Jun 2011

EXXONMOBIL VOY 2005 -- "NIGERIAN 8:00 A.M. RULE" -- DELAYS DUE MASTER’S REFUSAL TO SIGN BACKDATED BILL OF LADING (B/L) -- Charterer Award When Vessel concluded loading prior to 8 a.m. on the first day of the month, Charterer requested Master to sign a backdated B/L allegedly in accordance with Nigerian law and also allegedly a requirement of Clause 27 (a) of Part II of ExxonMobilvoy 2005. When Master refused to sign without a Letter of Indemnity Vessel was delayed in departing for six days for which Charterer refused to pay demurrage.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Seadancer, SMA No. 4131

ASBATANKVOY -- FLOATING STORAGE -- DELAYS CAUSING OWNER’S FOLLOW-ON FIXTURE TO BE CANCELLED -- DETENTION -- LOST PROFITS -- FORESEEABILITY -- Charterer Award Under a voyage charter, wherein the clause allowing Charterer the option of using Vessel as floating storage had been deleted, Vessel was delayed at disport causing the subsequent fixture between Owner and another charterer, made at the peak of the market, to be cancelled. Owner claimed for damages in the form of profits lost from the cancelled fixture.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Stolt Tankers Inc. v. Landmark Chemicals SA (The “Stolt Spur”) – QBD (Comm. Ct.), 21 Dec 2001

ASBATANKVOY -- DEMURRAGE -- WORKING OTHER CARGOES -- TANK CLEANING -- Charterer Award In the appeal to the High Court the judge agreed with the arbitrators that if the vessel was unavailable to the charterers for their cargo operations because she was being used by the owners for their own purposes, the owners were deriving a benefit even if the vessel was still waiting for a berth.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

National Shipping Co. of Saudi Arabia v. BP Oil Supply Co. (The “Abqaiq”) – Court of Appeal, 12 Oct 2011

BPVOY4 -- DEMURRAGE -- TIME-BAR -- DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED TIMELY BUT CLAIM MISLABELED AS DEVIATION -- COST OF BUNKERS FOR CALLING SAME BERTH TWICE -- Partial Owner Award This award is Owner’s appeal of the Commercial Court’s 22 Nov 10 decision. When Vessel was required by Charterer to attend to the same load berth twice, Owner invoiced the time and bunkers consumed for the second call as a deviation claim. In addition, demurrage was claimed by Owner for excess time used at the discharge port. Charterer agreed to and paid a "final agreed demurrage invoice" which covered demurrage and then claimed that the load port expenses should have been submitted as demurrage. Owner subsequently altered the load port claim such that it was for demurrage with Charterer subsequently denying it twofold; firstly, demurrage had already been settled in full and secondly, the claim for demurrage at the load port was now time-barred.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Great Eastern Shipping Co. Ltd. v. Far East Chartering Ltd. (The “Jag Ravi”) – English Court of Appeal, 9 Mar 2012

FOB SALES CONTRACT-- LETTER OF INDEMNITY -- WRONGFUL DELIVERY -- SALES CONTRACT -- Owner Award The Vessel discharged cargo without presentation of Bills of Lading (B/Ls) per the Receiver's Letter of Indemnity (LOI) to the Voyage Charterer. FOB Seller successfully claimed damages from Owner for delivering cargo without presentation of the Bills of Lading with Owner subsequently claiming indemnity from Receiver as Owner had acted as an agent of Charterer as referenced within the LOI.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Glory Wealth Shpping Pte. Ltd. v. Korea Line Corp. (The “Wren”) – QBD (Comm. Ct.), 14 July 2011

NYPE -- REPUDIATED TIME-CHARTER -- MEASURE OF DAMAGES -- Charterer Award and Seller Award This court case is an appeal by Charterer of an arbitration award. When the economy went sour, Charterer wrongfully repudiated a time-charter contract. At the time of the repudiation there was no available long-term charter market on which to base Owner’s damages. About six months later an available market developed. The arbitration panel awarded Owner damages using a hybrid assessment: actual losses based on spot trading and then market losses once a long-term charter market emerged (despite Owner opting, for own business reasons, to continue trading on the spot market).
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.