DEFAULT ON HIRE PAYMENT – FORCE MAJEURE – WRONGFUL ARREST AND ATTACHMENT – OBLIGATION TO PROCEED WITH REASONABLE DISPATCH – DOCTRINE OF FINANCIAL UNSEAWORTHINESS Upon the Charterer’s default on hire payments the Owner terminated the time charter party, which resulted in a delay at the discharge port and subsequent attachment and arrest of the Vessel. The Sub-Charterer claimed damages arising from the delay against the Owner, who counterclaimed for wrongful arrest and attachment of the Vessel. Under a time charter on the NYPE form Inter Merchant Marine Co Ltd (hereinafter, “Inter Merchant”) chartered the M/V INTER PRIDE (hereinafter, “Vessel”) to...
FORCE MAJEURE – HURRICANE – WHETHER FORCE MAJEURE WAS PREMATURE – LAYCAN – REPUDIATORY BREACH Owner claimed Charterer wrongfully repudiated the charter after Charterer declared force majeure prior to the laycan. J. Lauritzen Bulkers A/S (hereinafter, “Owner”) claimed against Interoceanic Corp. (hereinafter, “Charterer”) for repudiatory breach in contract following Charterer’s declaration of force majeure. The parties entered into a charter on an amended FOSFO form for carriage of a cargo of ammonium sulphate on the TBC PRESTIGE (hereinafter, “Vessel”) from the load port of Pasadena, Texas to ports in Brazil. The loading facility in Pasadena, PCI Nitrogen, was purchased by...
DEMURRAGE – OFF-SPECIFICATION OF CARGO – WHETHER CONTAMINATION ATTRIBUTABLE TO SHORE OPERATIONS OR VESSEL – READINESS TO LOAD When the cargo was found to be off-specification after loading the “first foot” Charterer requested the second foot be loaded to allow for the cargo to blend back to specification. Owner contended the contamination arose from the shore tanks rather than the Vessel. Delays incurred as a result of the testing and surveying process, which resulted in Owner’s claim for demurrage. Charterer countered that time was not to count during the delay as it was attributable to fault of Owner. Aurora Tankers...
DEMURRAGE – NO APPEARANCE – PAYMENT OF INTEREST AND ARBITRATION COSTS Owner sought payment of outstanding demurrage amount from Charterer and initiated arbitration proceedings. Charterer failed to participate in the proceedings, but it did submit payment of the outstanding demurrage amount following Owner’s submissions. Owner claimed for interest, attorney’s fees, and arbitration costs against Charterer. Caribe Tankers, Ltd (hereinafter, “Owner”) brought arbitration proceedings against Murex LLC (hereinafter, “Charterer”) over an unpaid demurrage amount totaling $31,119.08. The demurrage charges incurred under two charters, both fixed under Asbatankvoy, and two voyages of the CARIBE ROSA. Owner requested consolidation of the two demurrage...
GENERAL AVERAGE – WHETHER VESSEL WAS UNSEAWORTHY – OBLIGATION TO EXERCISE DUE DILIGENCE – WHETHER PASSAGE PLAN WAS DEFECTIVE Cargo interests refused to contribute to general average after the Vessel was grounded. It claimed the grounding was the result of the Owner’s failure to exercise due diligence in providing a seaworthy vessel. When the container vessel CMA CGM LIBRA (hereinafter, “Vessel”) was grounded whilst departing the port of Xiamen, China the cargo interests denied contribution to general average due to the cause of the grounding. The Owner stated that the grounding occurred as a result of an uncharted shoal. It...
PIRACY – HIRE – APPEAL – WHETHER CAPTURE AND ARREST CLAUSE APPLIED – WHETHER PIRACY CLAUSE APPLIED Owner claimed for lost hire from Charterer totaling about $5.6 million, the majority of which was lost due to the Vessel being captured by pirates. To support their claim, the Owner stated the capture and arrest clause did not apply since the Vessel was not captured by an “authority” as provided in the clause. Further, it was stated the piracy clause did not apply due to the capture occurring outside the geographical location listed in the clause. The Owner of the Eleni P...
DAMAGES – LOSS OF CARGO – WHETHER SEAWORTHINESS IS AN ABSOLUTE OBLIGATION – EXCLUSION CLAUSE – BILL OF LADING Cargo interests claimed damages against Owner for loss of deck cargo during the voyage. It was asserted that the Owner was liable due to negligence and its failure to ensure the vessel was seaworthy upon commencing the voyage. Owner contended that the exclusion clause provided in the bill of lading was applicable since it covered damages “howsoever caused”. The cargo interests (Aprile SpA and Others) claimed damages against Elin Maritime Ltd (hereinafter, “Owner”) for the loss of deck cargo resultant from...
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...
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...
DUE DILIGENCE – SAFE PORT SAFE BERTH WARRANTY – OIL SPILL – THIRD PARTY DAMAGES – SINGLE-POINT MOORING BUOY – PARTIAL FINAL AWARD Owner claimed against Charterer for hire and indemnity from a pollution incident during discharging operations. The basis of the Owner’s claim was the Charterer failed to exercise due diligence in nominating a safe berth. This partial final award determined the result of the indemnity claim. [dropcap]U[/dropcap]nder a time charter party on the Shelltime form with amendments, LR Mimosa Limited (hereinafter, “Owner”) entered into a charter of the M/T MIMOSA (hereinafter, “Vessel”) with Panamax International Shipping Company (hereinafter,...