2025 Maritime Digest of Arbitration Awards and Court Rulings

Bergesen DY Handygas v. Montpelier Trading Inc. (The “LPG/C Havbris”) – SMA No. 3503, 20 Jan 1999

ASBATANKVOY -- PORT -- DISPORT -- FREIGHT -- LOI -- BERTH -- DEMURRAGE -- Owner Award Before arriving at the contracted discharge port, the Charterers fixed a new disport per Charterers’ option. But upon arrival, the Owners refused to begin unloading until both the full freight payment and an LOI had been received from the new Receivers. The Vessel waited at berth for six days before payment, which the Owners submitted to the Charterers as demurrage.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Krupp Seeschiffahrt Gmbh v. Bayoil Supply & Trading Lt. (The “Ruhr Ore”) – SMA No. 3504, 15 Jan 1999

ASBATANKVOY -- DEMURRAGE -- USCG -- OFF-HIRE -- BREAKDOWN -- Owner Award Although the Charterers paid a majority of the demurrage claim, they refused to consider the two USCG-mandated 6H "crew rest periods" as demurrage. The Charterers argued that these rest periods are comparable to a Vessel “breakdown,” and as such, would render the Vessel off-hire and be for the Owners’ account.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Delphina Tanker Corp. v. Axel Johnson Energy Corp. (The “Delphina”) – SMA No. 3508, 5 Feb 1999

ASBATANKVOY -- BERTH -- DISPORT -- CHANNEL -- PORT -- ARBITRATION -- Charterer Award En route to berth at disport, the Vessel ran aground on an unchartered obstruction and spilled 16,000 gal. of cargo into the channel. The Owners argued that the berth was obviously unsafe due to the presence of an undiscovered rock at berth and demanded compensation. The Charterers, however, maintain that the berth was safe while citing instances of sister vessels berthing at port with no incidents.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Stolt Tankers, Inc. v. Clarissa Shipping Co. Ltd. (The “Lacerta”) – SMA No. 3515, 5 Mar 1999

SHELLTIME 3 -- VOYAGE -- CARGO -- CONTAMINATION -- SALVAGE -- TIME-BAR -- COSGA -- Partial Owner Award At some point along the voyage, the cargo had become contaminated and had to be sold as salvage at a great loss to the sub-charterers. The Charterers presented a timely claim to the Owners and communication about reimbursement continued between parties over the next year until the Vessel Owners declared the claim time-barred under COSGA.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Paige International Ltd. v. Adam Maritime Corp. and Glencore Ltd. (The “Saint Vassilios”) – SMA No. 3491, 11 Dec 1998

ASBATANKVOY -- CHARTER PARTY -- DECK LINES -- DEMURRAGE -- Owner Award As per the Charter Party, a cargo of LSWR was meant to be loaded between 125F – 135F, however, the LSWR was loaded at 115F – 120F which caused it to congeal and clog the deck lines. The Owner then invoiced the Charterers for cleaning expenses and the resulting demurrage incurred by the clogged lines.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Petro Jamaica v. Griffin Industries, Inc. (The “Petrojam Trader”) – SMA No. 3493, 14 Dec 1998

SHELLTIME 4 -- ARBITRATION -- VOYAGE -- BUNKER -- WEATHER -- ACT OF GOD -- OFF-HIRE -- Charterer Award This arbitration dispute encompasses several key points of contention that arise over the course of the voyage. The arguments include the Vessel’s bunker usage, compensation for Vessel damage resulting from harsh weather at berth, and various claims for off-hire.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Fireman’s Fund Insurance Co. v. Stolt Tankers Inc. (The “Stolt Resolute”) – SMA No. 3482, 10 Nov 1998

CARGO -- SAMPLE -- RECONDITIONING -- ARBITRATION -- Owner Award After sampling the cargo and finding it off spec, the Receiver’s insurance company demanded that the Owner pay for cargo reconditioning. The Owner argued that, upon delivery, the cargo was more pure than the Receiver’s average stock and counterclaimed for punitive cleaning damages.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Gaschem Tankers v. Montpelier Trading, Inc. (The “Elbegas”) – SMA No. 3484, 20 Nov 1998

ASBATANKVOY -- DEMURRAGE -- INTEREST -- ARBITRATION -- Owner Award The Charterers agreed to the Owners’ demurrage invoice; however, they failed to deliver payment over the course of several months. The Owners began arbitration to collect demurrage plus interest.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Texaco International Trader, Inc. v. Sunoco Overseas, Inc. (The “Proof Trader”) – SMA No. 3485, 30 Oct 1998

TEXACOVOY 94 -- LOADPORT -- MANIFOLD -- SALES AGREEMENT -- CANCELLATION -- ARBITRATION -- Seller Award The Vessel had been nominated by the Buyer and subsequently accepted by the Seller. But upon arrival to loadport, the placement of the Vessel’s manifolds made loading impossible and the Vessel was summarily rejected by the Seller. The Buyer claimed that the Seller breached the sales agreement by not rejecting the Vessel in a timely matter and began arbitration to recover cancellation expenses.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Windsor Investment Corp. v. Stolt Tankers, Inc. (The “Marilee”) – SMA No. 3487, 30 Nov 1998

SHELLTIME 3 -- TIME CHARTER -- OFF-HIRE -- TANKS -- Owner Award Throughout the life of the time charter, the Vessel was declared off-hire on numerous occasions for tank wall cleaning purposes. And at the end of the contract, the Charterers billed the Owners for the entirety of the time spent off-hire plus the cost of the tank cleaning chemicals.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.