Category: Featured

Agathonissos Special Maritime Enterprise v. ST Shipping & Transport PTE, Ltd. (The “Agathonissos”) – SMA No. 4248, 27 Mar 2015

ASBATANKVOY – PARTIAL FINAL AWARD – PARTIAL DEMURRAGE COLLECTION -- DELAYS AT OTHER PORTS EXTENDING FROM COLLISION AND REPAIRS – Owner Award Due to a collision in port Owner was required to repair the Vessel. Because of the delay the Owners contended that they should receive partial demurrage payment for the period after the collision. Charterer believed that a full hearing covering the entire voyage should be concluded before judgement can be passed on the demurrage from any single part of the voyage.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

London Arbitration 6/15

GENCON – LENGTHY LOAD PORT DELAYS – DEMURRAGE -- VALIDITY OF BILLS OF LADING – CARGO LIEN – Owner Award In this dispute significant load port delays led to the Owner and Charterer negotiating an addendum including supplemental compensation. Charterer did not establish a line of credit on time with Owner subsequently deeming the Charterer’s agents’ bills of lading invalid and exercised a lien on the cargo for the outstanding demurrage.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Maritime Industry News…In Brief

SUEZ CANAL . . . The new Suez Canal which is due to open on 6 August 2015 will increase the capacity of the existing canal allowing ships to pass north and south concurrently. The long term goal is to increase the daily average of transiting vessels from 49 ships presently to 97 ships by the year 2023, and increase the permissible draft to 66 feet. The waiting time is expected to be shortened to three hours (as opposed to the current 8-11 hours) and transit time will be cut to 11 hours (instead of 18-22 hours). www.suezcanal.gov.eg/nc.aspx PANAMA CANAL...
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Kassiopi Maritime Co Ltd v FAL Shipping Co Ltd (The “Adventure”) – QBD (Comm Ct.), 19 Feb 2015

BPVOY4 -- DEMURRAGE -- TIME BAR -- FREE PRATIQUE -- WHETHER ALL SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION PRESENTED WITH CLAIM -- Charterer Award This dispute concerns demurrage incurred due to delays at both ports of loading and discharge. Certain documents required by the charterparty, based on the BPVOY4 form, had not been submitted within the 90-day limit and Charterers were attempting a time bar defense.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

London Arbitration 3/15

FORCE MAJEURE -- LOADING OF BAUXITE CAUSING UNAVOIDABLE DUST -- SUSPENSION OF LOADING ORDERED BY PORT AUTHORITY -- WHETHER CHARTERERS LIABLE FOR DELAY -- Owner Award This dispute arose under a contract of carriage of a sepiolite cargo from “1-2 load berth chop always afloat Santander” to a UK port. Charterer asserted that the force majeure clause in the governing contract denied any Owner’s claim in the form of demurrage, or alternatively, damages, as a result of delays caused by the port authority’s suspension of loading operations.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Maritime Industry News…In Brief

EMISSIONS REGULATIONS  . . .  Hong Kong has announced that its emissions regulations for ocean going vessels will be ready to take effect from July 1, 2015.  The regulation requires fuel sulfur content  not to exceed 0.5 percent while at berth in Hong Kong (except during the first hour after arrival and the last hour before departure).  Breach of this regulation will result in a $25,000 fine and six month jail term for owners and masters.  Records of fuel switching must be maintained for three years. On 1 January 2015, MARPOL Annex VI, Regulation 14.3.4 came into effect, lowering fuel...
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

London Arbitration 14/14

ASBATANKVOY -- ARBITRATION JURISDICTION -- VALIDITY OF ARBITRATION AGREEMENT -- DEMURRAGE AND PORT COSTS -- Owner Award The Charterer denied liability for demurrage under several defenses. They argued that they never agreed to be liable for demurrage nor that there was a valid arbitration agreement. And if the Tribunal held that the charter party did provide for those considerations, then each party’s signature would be required for it to be a valid agreement.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

London Arbitration 19/14

NYPE -- TIME CHARTER -- NON-PAYMENT OF HIRE AND REPUDIATORY BREACH -- QUANTUM OF OWNER’S CLAIMS -- Owner Award This dispute arose under a time charter for two vessels for a period of 36 to 37 months with two additional optional periods (for each vessel) of 11 to 13 months. Vessels were delivered in February and April. Then in January the following year Charterer breached their obligation to pay hire causing Owner to withdraw the Vessels from Charterer’s service. In determining Charterer’s repudiatory breach, the Tribunal decided the appropriate measure of damages for lost hire and stevedore damages.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

Maritime Industry News…In Brief

ELECTRONIC BILLS OF LADING . . .BIMCO’s new charter party clause for electronic bills of lading provides a contractual solution for the creation, transfer and surrender of electronic bills. The clause states: “(A) AT THE CHARTERERS’ OPTION, BILLS OF LADING, WAYBILLS AND DELIVERY ORDERS REFERRED TO IN THIS CHARTER PARTY SHALL BE ISSUED, SIGNED AND TRANSMITTED IN ELECTRONIC FORM WITH THE SAME EFFECT AS THEIR PAPER EQUIVALENT. (B) FOR THE PURPOSE OF SUB-CLAUSE (A) THE OWNERS SHALL SUBSCRIBE TO AND USE ELECTRONIC (PAPERLESS) TRADING SYSTEMS AS DIRECTED BY THE CHARTERERS, PROVIDED SUCH SYSTEMS ARE APPROVED BY THE INTERNATIONAL GROUP OF...
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.

American Overseas Marine Corporation v Golar Commodities Ltd (The “LNG Gemini”) – QBD (Comm. Ct.), 7 May 2014

TIME CHARTER -- INJURIOUS CARGO DEFINED -- DEBRIS IN PUMPS AND TANKS -- Charterer Award Under a time charter contract, the Vessel loaded a cargo of LNG for the Charterer’s account. After the operation, it was reported that debris could have been introduced into the cargo tanks, however nothing was noticeably wrong at the time. During the course of the following voyages, intermittent problems accumulated until the Vessel had to undergo extensive repairs. Owner blamed the Charterer’s cargo and filed a damages claim to recover their losses.
To access this content, you must either Log In or Subscribe.