Author: Erinn Miller
Dorval SC Tankers Inc. v SeaRiver Maritime, LLC, (The “GOLDEN AUSTRALIS”) – SMA No. 4465, 7 September 2023
Naviera Transoceanica and Products Tankers Management Company v PetroChina International (America) Inc. – SMA No. 4464, 29 August 2023
Oslo Caribbean Carrier v Knowles Construction & Development Co. Ltd. (The “SEA CARRIER”), SMA No. 4463, 3 August 2023
Singapore Arbitration 3/23
Singapore Arbitration 2/23
Phibro Renewables AG v. Formosa Plastic Marine Corp. – SMA No. 4462, 25 July 2023
CHARTERPARTY BREACH – LATE DELIVERY – CARGO SPECIFICATIONS – ABANDONED CARGO – VESSEL SUBSTITUTION
In this arbitration between Phibro Renewables AG (Charterer) and Formosa Plastic Marine Corporation (Owner), disputes arose from a charterparty agreement concerning the transportation of 5,000 metric tons of UCOME. Charterer claimed damages due to alleged breaches by Owner, including late delivery and vessel substitution, while Owner counterclaimed due to alleged cargo loss.
FIMBank plc v. KCH Shipping Co Ltd– Court of Appeal, 24 May 2023
TIME BAR – DEMURRAGE – MISDELIVERY OF CARGO – HAGUE-VISBY RULES – CONGENBILL FORM – BILLS OF LADING – FINANCING OF CARGO
FIMBank appealed a decision regarding the misdelivery of cargo, revolving around the application of the Hague-Visby Rules and the time bar provision. The Court of Appeal analyzed the evolution of the Hague-Visby rule’s wording and its implications. The court also examined the potential of an implied term within the bills of lading.
Seastar Maritime Ltd. v. AUM Scrap and Metal Waste Trading LLC. (MT “AMIAS”) – SMA No. 4455, 12 December 2022
DEMURRAGE – CHARTERPARTY BREACH – DEVIATION – LOSS MITIGATION
The MT AMIAS was chartered by AUM from Seastar using the Asbatankvoy form with rider clauses to carry Methanol in bulk from Venezuela to 1-2 Safe Port/ 1 Safe Berth (Kandla to Chennai Range). The Vessel finished loading in Venezuela and submitted its invoice for 70% freight for payment within 10 days, per the charterparty. AUM did not pay, and the Vessel stayed in port until May 11. Seastar was forced to seek alternate employment to mitigate losses, which required calling another port. Both parties agreed upon an earlier settlement, but AUM did not pay it either.
London Arbitration 2/23
DEMURRAGE – GROUNDING – SAFE PORT – SEAWORTHY – NEGLIGENCE – NYPE 1981
The subject vessel was chartered for a one-time charter trip with one leg via Indonesia to China. The vessel grounded while under pilotage in the port of Chaozhou. She suffered damage to her port side hull structure. The owner claimed that the port was unsafe and in breach of the charterparty. The charterer claimed the damage was due to negligence in navigation and unseaworthiness.