Category: U.S. Maritime Cases
ASBATANKVOY — CHARTER PARTY — DEMURRAGE — TERMINAL LOGS — TIME-BAR — Charterer Award
This case’s Charter Party clearly stipulates that there are no grounds for demurrage unless the claim (along with supporting documentation) is received within ninety days of cargo discharge. So when the Owner submitted a claim on the ninetieth day without the specifically outlined terminal logs, the Charterer deemed the demurrage time-barred by the Charter Party.
CONTRACT OF AFFREIGHTMENT — BERTH — DISPORT — DREDGE PIPE — CHANNEL — GROUNDING — ARBITRATION — UNSAFE BERTH — Charterer Award
While moving to berth at disport, the Vessel ran aground on an abandoned dredge pipe in the navigation channel. The Owner followed suit with an arbitration charge for the damages sustained in the grounding, claiming that the Charterer had breached the safe berth warranty. The Charterer counterclaimed that the Owner faulted the grounding citing the Owner’s frequent usage of the port in the past as well as the lack of prior Owner proof that the berth was unsafe.
NORGRAIN 89 — CHARTER PARTY — GOVERNMENT CURFEW — CARGO — DEMURRAGE — BERTH — DISPORT — Owner Award
The Charter Party specifically stated that if cargo cannot be discharged because of “Civil Commotions,” then there cannot be any demurrage claim for lost time. But, when the Vessel berthed at disport and a national curfew was in place, the Owner filed for demurrage regardless arguing that the curfew did not prevent the cargo from being discharged, but instead the subsequent lack of trucks leaving the port was the root cause of detainment.
ASBATANKVOY — ARBITRATION — PUMP WARRANTY — MANIFOLD — DEMURRAGE — LATE PAYMENT — PUMP WARRANTY — Owner Award
This arbitration centers around the finer aspects of the pump warranty. In this case, the Charterers argue that the agreed pressure at the Vessel’s manifold was not maintained throughout the unloading. The Owners, on the other hand, stipulate that the referenced pressure drops were at the beginning and end of discharge, a common safety and loss prevention practice.
SALES CONTRACT — SHIPPING — DEMURRAGE — ARBITRATION — DETENTION — PORT — CARGO — VETTING — Buyer Award
The Buyer preliminarily contacted the Seller to ask if the Vessel characteristics agreed with Seller requirements for shipping. After granting approval, the Seller allegedly sent documents stipulating that the agreement was conditional on whether the Vessel had an operating VR system. However, the Buyer never received such stipulations and submitted demurrage for delays at port when the Seller refused Vessel loading without VR.
BALTIMORE GRAIN CP — DISPORT — BERTH — ARBITRATION — LAYTIME — PORT — Partial Owner Award
Although blocked by disport by seventeen miles of ice, the Vessel tendered NOR and awaited icebreaker assistance for five days before continuing to berth. At arbitration, the Owners view the NOR as a valid beginning of laytime and any further delays at port were the fault of the Charterers. The Charterers counterclaimed that an NOR tendered seventeen miles from port limits cannot be considered valid.
ASBATANKVOY — DEMURRAGE — ARBITRATION — TIME-BAR — BARGE — DISPORT — CLAIM — Owner Award
In this case, there were four separate demurrage issues under dispute. Arbitration disputes focused on the time-bar clause, the allocation of time spent overloading the Vessel and subsequent reloading, delays waiting for the Charterer’s barge at disport, and the Owner’s right to increase a claim.
ASBATANKVOY — DISCHARGE — PORT — DRAFT — DEMURRAGE — ARBITRATION — Charterer Award
The Vessel was required to discharge at two separate ports, however, the draft was erroneously calculated to only accommodate the deeper port. And upon arrival at the deeper port, the berth was occupied by another vessel thereby detaining the Owner’s Vessel. So in response to Owner’s subsequent demurrage, the Charterers blame the erroneous draft level for the delay because otherwise the Vessel could discharge at the shallower (but unoccupied) port first.
ASBATANKVOY — ARRIVAL DRAFT — DISPORT — DEMURRAGE — DRAFT — CHARTER PARTY — LAYTIME — ARBITRATION — Charterer Award
Although the Charterers assured that an arrival draft of forty feet was acceptable, tidal changes delayed the Vessel’s arrival to disport. The Owners submitted a claim for demurrage arguing that the Charterers draft levels kept the Vessel from reaching disport. But the Charterers reference a clause in the Charter Party which states that tidal delays cannot count as laytime in arbitration.
ASBATANKVOY — CARGO — BARGE — BERTH — PORT — DEMURRAGE — ACT OF GOD — Owner Award
After part cargo discharge to barge, bad weather delayed the Vessel’s berth at port thereby incurring an Owner demurrage claim. The Charterer agreed to the fine, however, requested that this claim be offset by consolidating it with other outstanding claims that the Owner owes to the Charterer (making net demurrage due Charterer).
