2024 Maritime Digest of Arbitration Awards and Court Rulings
ASBATANKVOY -- ARBITRATION -- CHARTER PARTY -- CONTAMINATION -- INSPECTION -- TANK SAMPLE -- Charterer Award
The Owners brought arbitration against the Charterers because of an alleged wrongful cancellation of the charter party. In this case, the Vessel was chartered to load a cargo of clean propylene oxide, but failed tank inspection multiple times at loadport. And after the Master did not offer any further cleaning, the Charterer rejected the Vessel and cancelled the charter.
VEGOILVOY -- DEADFREIGHT -- LAYTIME -- CARGO -- DAMAGES -- Partial Charterer Award
Because of Charterer-incurred deadfreight, the Owners computed their laytime allowances based on the amount of cargo loaded. They argued that deadfreight is an element of damages that has no bearings on allowed laytime. The Charterers, on the other hand, contend that a fully loaded Vessel should be the basis for allowed laytime.
ASBATANKVOY -- PLATFORM -- MOORING -- BERTH -- DEMURRAGE -- SHIFTING -- ARBITRATION -- Draw / Claim Offset
The Vessel arrived at the nominated offshore discharge platform with insufficient equipment to secure the Vessel to the mooring system. The Charterers then redirected the Vessel to a shore berth and completed discharge without incident. The Owners submitted a demurrage claim for the excess shifting time while the Charterers counterclaim for shore berth expenses.
SHELLVOY 5 -- ARBITRATION -- PUMP WARRANTY -- CHARTER PARTY -- DEMURRAGE -- PRECEDENCE -- Charterer Award
At arbitration, disputes centered upon the interpretation and execution of the pump warranty. The Owners submitted a demurrage claim for excess pumping time and argued that the Charterers had set a charter- amending precedent by agreeing to the Owners’ interpretation of the pump warranty in the past. The Charterers refute any such precedent for open claims.
EXXONVOY 90 -- ANCHORAGE -- CHANNEL -- FOG -- ARBITRATION -- DEMURRAGE -- PORT -- Charterer Award
Upon tendering NOR at an uncustomary anchorage 226 miles away from port, dense fog forced the Vessel to wait three additional days before undergoing a necessary US Coast Guard survey and proceeding to customary anchorage. At arbitration, the Owners claim this time under demurrage while the Charterers argue that the Vessel was not an "arrived ship" 226 miles away from port.
ASBATANKVOY -- LOADPORT -- BERTH -- ICE BREAKER -- CARGO -- PORT -- VOYAGE -- Charterer Award
Because the loadport’s national ice service increased ice class limitations on entering vessels, the Vessel was denied access to berth, and subsequently, the voyage was terminated. The Owners blame the Charterers for failing in their obligation to find a safe berth upon arrival. Conversely, the Charterers argue that their supplier could not provide cargo at another port and accuse the Owners of failing to provide an appropriate vessel for the voyage.
ASBATANKVOY -- WORLDSCALE -- DISPORT -- LIGHTERING -- BERTH -- FREIGHT -- Charterer Award
Fixed under a contract where Worldscale terms apply when not already defined, the Vessel was chartered to discharge at three different locations. However, at one location, the Owners are claiming that because of dual operations (lightering and berthing), they should count as two separate disports which would require extra freight compensation from the Charterers.
AMWELSH -- STEAMING -- BERTH -- PORT -- DRAFT -- DEMURRAGE -- Owner Award
Because of delays steaming upriver, the Vessel missed her designated berthing time and was forced to wait once she arrived at port. The Owners contend that this delay was due to an insufficient draft while steaming, therefore making it demurrage. The Charterers, on the other hand, argue that this time was un-billable because engine trouble caused the delays to port.
ASBATANKVOY -- DISPORT -- DEMURRAGE -- BERTH -- SHORESIDE -- ARBITRATION -- CHARTER PARTY -- Owner Award
Upon arriving at disport, the Vessel accrued extensive demurrage while being forced to wait for a free berth and shoreside storage space. And when the Owner started arbitration to recover demurrage, the Charterers did not appoint an arbitrator, denied the existence of a binding charter party, and refused to acknowledge the jurisdiction of the Panel to settle disputes.
ASBATANKVOY -- DISPORT -- DEMURRAGE -- BERTH -- SHORESIDE -- ARBITRATION -- CHARTER PARTY -- Owner Award
Upon arriving at disport, the Vessel accrued extensive demurrage while being forced to wait for a free berth and shoreside storage space. And when the Owner started arbitration to recover demurrage, the Charterers did not appoint an arbitrator, denied the existence of a binding charter party, and refused to acknowledge the jurisdiction of the Panel to settle disputes.
