2025 Maritime Digest of Arbitration Awards and Court Rulings
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.
ASBATANKVOY -- ARBITRATION -- VOYAGE -- DISPORT -- CARGO -- SAMPLE -- CONTAMINATION -- BERTH -- Partial and Full Owner Award
The Owners began arbitration to collect outstanding payments on two separate voyages with the Charterers. On the first voyage, the Vessel was delayed for two days at disport when cargo samples revealed unacceptable water content. And on the second voyage, when the Vessel arrived at disport, she was forced to wait ten days for berthing instructions.
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.
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 -- 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.
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.
MOBILVOY 96 -- PART CARGO -- DEADFREIGHT -- CARGO -- Partial Owner Award
The Charterers refused to load their decene part cargo because of excess temperature inflowing from adjacent heating tanks. The Owners subsequently filed for deadfreight damages and claimed that the Charterers had allowed cargo loading in a similar case a year earlier. The Charterers, however, denied payment because of the Owner’s failure to provide "a suitable safe space for the cargo."
ASBATANKVOY -- VALVE -- DISPONENT -- LIGHTERING -- BERTH -- DISPORT -- NOR -- PORT -- DEMURRAGE -- CHARTER PARTY -- SEAWORTHINESS -- DUE DILIGENCE -- Owner Award
Due to a valve malfunction, the Disponent Owners’ nominated lightering Vessel missed her berth call at disport and was forced to re-tender NOR. The Owners then argued that the delays incurred at port were beyond their control and likewise defined as demurrage by the charter. But the Sub-Charterers refused their claim per Vessel unseaworthiness and lack of Owners’ due diligence.
ASBATANKVOY -- PORT -- NOR -- WAIVER -- BERTH -- Charterer Award
Because the port only accepted Vessels less than 16 years of age, the 1975-built Vessel was quickly rejected after tendering her NOR. The Charterers argued that the NOR was invalid due to the Owners’ failure to obtain a waiver and conform to the port regulations. The Owners, on the other hand, contend that the Charterers customarily acquire the waiver. And furthermore, the berth was congested upon arrival, meaning that no time was lost in obtaining the waiver.
