Category: English Maritime Cases

Shipping industry court rulings and arbitration awards under English law.

London Arbitration 24/19

TIME CHARTER – AMENDED NYPE CHARTERPARTY – FINAL HIRE – SPEED AND CONSUMPTION – VESSEL UNDERPERFORMANCE – WHETHER CONSIDERED GOOD WEATHER CONDITIONS – BUNKERS ON REDELIVERY After Owners claimed against Charterers for the alleged underperformance of the Vessel and failure to redeliver the Vessel to Owners with the correct amount of bunkers. The Tribunal was then left to determine whether the Charterer provided adequate proof to deny any amount due to Owner.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Classic Maritime Inc v Limbungan Makmur Sdn Bhd and Another – Court of Appeal (Haddon-Cave, Males and Rose LJJ) [2019] EWCA Civ 1102 – 27 June 2019

CONTRACT OF AFFREIGHTMENT – FORCE MAJEURE – CLAIMED DAMAGES – CHARTERERS OBLIGATION TO PROVIDE CARGO – “BUT FOR” TEST – COMPENSATORY PRINCIPLE – OWNER’S APPEAL – CHARTERER’S CROSS-APPEAL After Charterers were found not liable for the damages incurred due to their failure to provide cargo for multiple shipments, Owners then appealed to the Court of Appeal on the damages incurred from the missed shipments whilst Charterers cross-appealed on their liability to provide the cargoes basis the agreed force majeure clause.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Mur Shipping BV v Louis Dreyfus Company Suisse SA (The “Tiger Shanghai”) – QBD (Comm Ct) (Cockerill J) [2019] EWHC 3240 (Comm) – 13 November 2019 [Updated 10 August 2020]

TIMEBAR – BREACH OF CHARTERPARTY – NULLIFYING DOCUMENTS – INCOMPLETE CLAIMS Arbitration proceedings were brought against the owner's alleged breach of charterparty by refusing vessel modifications per charterer’s request. However, charterer’s left out a supporting document from their claim. Ultimately, the court decided that the documentation was time-barred, causing the cause to be dismissed.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

London Arbitration 23/19

TIME CHARTER – OFF-HIRE – WHETHER ANCHOR FOULED – VESSEL SEAWORTHINESS – DELAY TO BERTH
After receiving the berthing orders from Charterer, the time-chartered Vessel was unable to raise its anchor and proceed to berth for a limited period of time. Charterers then claimed that during this delay to berth that the Vessel was off hire. Owner claimed against Charterer for the unpaid hire/ damages, whilst Charterers denied liability and submitted a counterclaim against the Owner.

London Arbitration 2/20

FIXTURE RECAP TERMS – AMENDED CLEAN GENCON 1994 CHARTERPARTY – MAIN AGREED TERMS – ARBITRATOR’S JURISDICTION – ARBITRATION PROVISIONS AND CLAUSES When disputes arose between the Owner and Charterer, Owners then appointed an arbitrator. Charterers in turn challenged the arbitrator’s jurisdiction, claiming that no agreed arbitration provision was included within the charterparty.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Alize 1954 and Another v Allianz Elementar Versicherungs AG and Others (The “CMA CGM Libra”) – Court of Appeal (Flaux, Haddon-Cave and Males LJJ) [2020] EWCA Civ 293 – 4 March 2020

GENERAL AVERAGE – VESSEL GROUNDING ON UNCHARTED SHOAL – VESSEL SEAWORTHINESS – OWNERS OBLIGATION TO EXERCISE DUE DILIGENCE – VESSELS DEFECTIVE PASSAGE PLAN – OWNERS APPEAL – Charterer Award In an appeal over the cargo interests being found not liable to contribute to the general average after the Vessel was grounded, the Court of Appeal was called on to determine if the Vessel’s passage plan rendered the Vessel unseaworthy.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Quiana Navigation SA v Pacific Gulf Shipping (Singapore Pte Ltd (The “Caravos Liberty”) – QBD (Comm Ct) (Cockerill J) [2019] EWHC 3171 (Comm) – 21 November 2019

NYPE - TIME CHARTER - HIRE - ANTI-TECHNICALITY NOTICE (ATN) - BIMCO NON-PAYMENT OF HIRE CLAUSE - REPUDIATORY BREACH The charterer and the owner of a vessel got into a dispute over the alleged overconsumption of fuel. The appeal of the owner was later dismissed.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

London Arbitration 16/19

DEMURRAGE – LAYTIME – NOTICE OF READINESS – LACK OF ANCHORS – RIVER NAVIGATION – WHETHER NOTICE OF READINESS IS VALID – ESCORTING TUGS – DELAY TO BERTH After previously losing one of it’s anchors in a storm, the pilot refused to navigate the vessel up river unless the Owner also hired an escort tug. This option was refused by Owners, ultimately delaying the vessel to the discharge berth.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Alianca Navegacao e Logistica Ltda v Ameropa SA (The “Santa Isabella”) – QBD (Comm Ct) (Andrew Henshaw QC sitting as a Judge of the High Court) [2019] EWHC 3152 (Comm) – 22 November 2019

Upon arrival at the disport, cargo damage was discovered which delayed discharge. Charterers argued they are not liable for the delays or damage to the cargo on the account of owners failing to properly care for the cargo or choose the “usual and reasonable route”. The key issues addressed for a decision were: choice of route, vessel speed/reasonable despatch, ventilation, re-infestation, quarantine, and delays in discharging.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.