2024 Maritime Digest of Arbitration Awards and Court Rulings
ASBATANKVOY -- DISPORT -- PUMP WARRANTY -- TERMINAL -- SHORELINES -- GENERATOR -- Owner Award
While at sea, the Vessel suffered a breakdown that left her with only one operating generator. And once at disport, the Charterer complained of pumping delays and argued that such delays were faulted by the lack of generator power. The Owners, on the other hand, claimed that the lack of terminal shorelines for discharge caused the delays.
ASBATANKVOY -- CARGO -- FREIGHT -- PREMIUM -- HIGH POUR -- ROB -- ARBITRATION -- COW -- Charterer Award
The Charterers paid an additional freight premium to keep their "high pour" cargo heated to 110°F. However, 6,000 bbls remained on board due to heating coils being out of place and insufficient crude oil washing. The Charterers began arbitration to recover the Owner-faulted cargo loss.
EXXONVOY 90 -- ARBITRATION -- DEMURRAGE -- TIME-BAR -- CHARTER PARTY -- Charterer Award
In this case, the Owner began arbitration to recover a demurrage claim that was allegedly time-barred. The charter party stipulates that a notice must be submitted within ninety days of discharge completion, followed by all supporting evidence within 150 days of discharge. The notice and full claim were received on the ninety-first day, which the Owners contend satisfies the charter.
ASBATANKVOY -- LOADPORT -- VOYAGE -- CARGO -- CHARTER PARTY -- DEMURRAGE -- DEVIATION -- Owner Award
Once at loadport, the surveyor inspected the Vessel’s tanks and rejected them per latex residue from the previous voyage’s cargo. But even after cleaning and re-tendering NOR, latex residue was still found in surveyor samples. So, the Owners ordered the Vessel to fulfill other charters, and later submitted a claim for demurrage and subsequent deviation costs.
ASBATANKVOY -- ARBITRATION -- DEMURRAGE -- SHIFTING -- BUNKERS -- SLOW STEAMING -- Owner Award
This arbitration resulted from the Charterer’s failure to pay an outstanding demurrage claim and an invoice for shifting expenses, and failed to reimburse the Owner for under-consumed bunkers from slow steaming.
ASBATANKVOY -- LOADPORT -- CONTAMINATION -- RESIDUE -- BERTH -- DRAFT -- DEMURRAGE -- DETENTION -- Charterer Award
Upon arriving at loadport, the Vessel’s tanks were rejected due to .01 cm of cargo residue and forced the Vessel off berth to be cleaned. Once cleaned, the Vessel loaded the cargo with no incident, but incurred delays once again because of low water levels in the channel. The Owners submitted a demurrage claim inclusive of both the superfluous cleaning time and the detention trying to leave berth.
ASBATANKVOY -- ARBITRATION -- SHIFTING -- WAITING TIME -- BERTH -- DEMURRAGE -- Partial Owner Award
This arbitration centers upon the appropriation of waiting and shifting time between berths at loadport. In this case, the Vessel shifted from one berth and was forced to wait at another for 30H 16M. The Owners billed the Charterers for this delay under "shifting time"; however, the Charterers argue that the time between a dropped anchor and the commencement of shifting should be considered un-billable “waiting time.”
ASBATANKVOY -- LOADPORT -- LAYDAY -- BERTH -- CARGO -- ARBITRATION -- DEMURRAGE -- Owner Award
Although the Vessel arrived at loadport and tendered NOR after laydays had expired, the Charterer did not protest against the Vessel’s latency. So, the Vessel berthed, loaded the cargo, and sailed with no incident. And afterwards, the Owner began arbitration to recover the demurrage invoice.
ASBATANKVOY -- CHARTER PARTY -- CARGO -- BERTH -- LIGHTERING -- LAYTIME -- Charterer Award
As arranged in the charter party, the Vessel lightered 2,100 mt of the Charterers’ cargo and waited for a free berth to discharge the rest. But while waiting, the Vessel began lightering a different charterer’s part cargo and missed its chance to berth and unload. The Charterers argue that the resulting excess time at port was the result of the Owners’ decision to fulfill another cargo interest and should not count as laytime.
NYPE -- VOYAGE -- OFF-HIRE -- SPEED WARRANTY -- BUNKER -- P&I CLUB -- Partial Charterer Award
After voyage, the Charterer demanded compensation for: an off-hire period to change Vessel crews, a breach in the minimum speed warranty, and bunker over-consumption. The Owners counterclaim that the Charterers’ fuel and speed analyses do not take into account the ½ knot below and 5% above speed and fuel allowances, respectively, given to the Owners by their P&I club.
