Author: Tom Haugen

Sonact Group Ltd v. Premuda SpA (The “Four Island”) – QBD (Comm Ct), 12 December 2018

DEMURRAGE – ASBATANKVOY – ARBITRATION CLAUSE – WHETHER ARBITRATORS HAD JURISDICTION – SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT  Charterer contended Owner’s demurrage and heating cost claim after it was brought to arbitration. It asserted that the claim was not in the arbitrator’s jurisdiction as it arose from the settlement agreement, which did not contain an arbitration clause.  Under an amended Asbatankvoy form the vessel Four Island was chartered for carriage of fuel oil from Kavkaz to the discharge port of Novhodka in Russia. Owner claimed for demurrage and heating costs against Charterers totaling $909,148.08, which was settled in emails where the Charterer agreed to...
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

London Arbitration 6/19

SPEED AND CONSUMPTION WARRANTIES – PERFORMANCE CLAIMS – GOOD WEATHER CONDITIONS – DOUGLAS SEA STATE – SIGNIFICANT WAVE HEIGHT  The Charterer claimed for damages for breach in the speed and performance warranty against Owner. Owner contended that there were no periods of time that satisfied “good weather” conditions.  Charterer issued a performance claim against Owner amounting to a total of $128,388.86 for lost time and overconsumption of bunkers during a time charter trip from South Africa to China. Owner contended that they were not in breach of the speed and consumption warranty as there were no days that satisfied the...
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Toptip Holding Pte Ltd v Mercuria Energy Trading Pte Ltd and Another (The “Pan Gold”) – Court of Appeal (Sundaresh Menon CJ, Andrew Phang Boon Leong and Judith Prakash JJA) SGCA 64 – 23 November 2017

REPUDIATORY BREACH – CHARTER PARTY – EXISTENCE OF A COMPLETED CONTRACT – PRO FORMA CHARTER PARTY – COURT OF APPEAL The claimant charterer filed damages against defendant disponent owner for repudiatory breach of a charter party. The defendant argued that the presence of a Subject Review clause implied no formal contract existed. [dropcap]T[/dropcap]optip Holding Pte Ltd (hereinafter, “Toptip”) as charterer claimed damages against Mercuria Energy Trading Pte Ltd (hereinafter, “Mercuria”) as disponent owner for repudiatory breach of a charter party. Toptip claimed for the difference in freight rate between the charter party with Mercuria and the substitute charter party. The...
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

London Arbitration 2/18

SALE OF GOODS (CFR) - DEMURRAGE - TIMELY PAYMENT OF FREIGHT - OBLIGATIONS UNDER SALES CONTRACT VS UNDER CHARTERPARTY - OWNERS REFUSING TO RELEASE BILLS OF LADING UNTIL FREIGHT PAYMENT The CFR Sellers brought arbitration against their Buyers in order to indemnify themselves for demurrage caused by the Buyers delaying payment of the Owner’s freight.  Sellers argued that it was the Buyer’s responsibility to pay freight promptly under the contract. The Buyers countered that the obligation to pay freight accrued under the Seller’s charterparty, and therefore it was the Seller’s responsibility.  
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

London Arbitration 25/17

TIME CHARTER - VESSEL’S CONDITION UPON REDELIVERY - BREACH OF CHARTER When Charterer sat the Vessel at an equatorial port for 35 days, the Owner claimed underperformance damages incurred under a subsequent fixture and the cost to clean the hull.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

London Arbitration 23/17

DEMURRAGE - OIL SPILL - FORCE MAJEURE - PROCEED THERETO - REACHABLE ON ARRIVAL - ARREST OR RESTRAINT OF PRINCES - BPVOY3 Before the vessel’s arrival at port, a vessel at the vessel’s intended berth had an oil spill which delayed the vessel once she arrived at the port.  Charterer argued to split the delay 50/50 wherein owner stated that BPVOY3’s “proceed thereto” was to be read as “reachable on arrival”, the spill was not an exception, and the prior vessel’s arrest was not an “arrest or restraint of princes, rulers or people”.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

London Arbitration 1/17

DEMURRAGE - DETENTION - WHETHER VESSEL IN BREACH OF PUMP WARRANTY - WHETHER OWNER SHOULD BEAR EXTRA SHIFTING EXPENSES INCURRED WHEN THE VESSEL WAS ORDERED OFF THE DOCK DUE TO SLOW DISCHARGE - DELAY AWAITING DOCUMENTS AT DISPORT Due to a slow discharge rate, the vessel was forced off her berth by port authorities. And after hoses disconnected at the disport, the vessel was delayed in departing for over 4 hours whilst awaiting documents onboard. Charterer denied Owner’s subsequent claims for demurrage, additional shifting expenses, and detention leading to this arbitration.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Industry-Accepted NOR Procedure Tested by Oiltanking Texas City

Tendering a valid NOR for Oiltanking Texas City just got a little harder to do thanks to a recent change of policy for the 555,000 cbm storage facility. On Wednesday, 13-Jan-2016 an Oiltanking representative released a new “Oiltanking Texas City’s ‘NOR’ Acceptance Procedure” that is in direct opposition to the current NOR tender policy for the Houston / Texas City area.