Category: U.S. Maritime Cases

Lukoil Pan Americas, LLC, Claimant, and Methanol Holdings Trinidad Ltd., Respondent – SMA 4340

REPUDIATORY BREACH – WAIT FOR ORDERS CLAUSE – WFO – DAMAGES DUE TO EARLY TENDERING OF NOR – NOTICE OF READINESS – SUPPLY CONTRACT – WARRANTED SPEED Charterer suffered losses resulting from an early tendered notice of readiness. Owner contended that the Charterer was not in its rights to delay the voyage as it had...

To access this post, you must purchase Annual Subscription or 2 Year Subscription.

Lexmar Corporation of Liberia, Chartered Owner, and Tricentrol Oil Trading Inc., S.A., Charterer, of the M/T GLEFI I – SMA 3199

VOYAGE CHARTER PARTY – DETENTION – SAFE PORT – SAFE BERTH – PORT OF HOUSTON Under the auspices that the Port of Houston was an unsafe port when the Vessel could not depart its discharge berth after a tug sank in the ship channel, Owner claimed detention.  Charterer contended that the contractual agreement ended upon...

To access this post, you must purchase Annual Subscription or 2 Year Subscription.

Blue Fin Tankers Inc. as Disponent Owner of the MIT DA YUAN HU and MIT DA MING HU as Claimant, and Owner and Tesoro Far East Maritime Company SA as Charterer, and Respondent – SMA 4323

DEMURRAGE – SUSPENDED LAYTIME – TAKING ON LUBE / SPARES – INTERNAL STRIPPING – PUMP WARRANTY – INTEREST – ASDEM PUMPING PERFORMANCE FORMULA Upon receipt of Owner’s demurrage claims, charterer deducted time whilst Vessel loaded lube and spares, internal stripping during discharge, and a deduction for failing to discharge within the warranted 24 hours or...

To access this post, you must purchase Annual Subscription or 2 Year Subscription.

Macsteel International USA Corp. v. Inter Merchant Marine Co. Ltd. – SMA 4322, 14 Aug 2017

PARTIAL FINAL AWARD – ARREST AND ATTACHMENT OF VESSEL – MARITIME LIEN – DEFAULT IN HIRE – UNSEAWORTHY

The vessel was denied entry into a prior port for other charterers’ accounts which subsequently delayed her arrival at charterer’s disport. The panel was tasked to determine the party at fault for the delay and whether demurrage and other damages for barges awaiting the vessel at charterer’s disport for transshipment purposes were to be considered as consequential.

To access this post, you must purchase Annual Subscription or 2 Year Subscription.

Thorco Shipping A/S v. Effie Business Corporation S.A. (The “Thorco China”) – SMA 4316, 15 December 2015

NORGRAIN 1973 – FIRE – NORGRAIN EXCEPTIONS CLAUSE – IMPRACTICALITY – REPUDIATED / CANCELLED CHARTER PARTY

Due to a cargo elevator, allegedly needed in order for a vessel to discharge bulk cargo, being unavailable due to fire, Charterer cancelled the charter party due to commercial impracticality and a clause in the C/P.

To access this post, you must purchase Annual Subscription or 2 Year Subscription.

Wagenborg Shipping v. Rain CII Carbon (The “Azoresborg”) – SMA 4314, 17 May 2017

AMWELSH – CANCELLED / REPUDIATED CHARTER PARTY – MITIGATED LOSSES – BALLAST VOYAGE – SUBSTITUTE EMPLOYMENT – POSITIONING VOYAGE

Upon cancelling the charter party during loading Charterer instructed Owner to mitigate losses by seeking other cargos. Owner repositioned the original vessel and had a sister ship sail a ballast voyage to the delivery location of the follow on time charter of the original ship.  Owner claimed for lost income and bunker costs due to repositioning.

To access this post, you must purchase Annual Subscription or 2 Year Subscription.

Agathonissos Special Maritime Enterprise v. ST Shipping & Transport PTE, Ltd. (The “Aganthonissos”) – SMA 4315, 31 May 2017

ASBATANKVOY – COLLISION – ALLISION – SHIP TO SHIP (STS) – SAFE BERTHING / SHIFTING – GENERAL EXCEPTIONS – CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE – SEAWORTHY – INCOMPETENCE – LANGUAGE BARRIER – DEMURRAGE – DAMAGES

Prior to a Ship to Ship Transfer a supply boat collided with the tanker (“Agathonissos”) it was sent to support.  The Agathonissos subsequently was delayed in lightering the vessel to be lightered (VTBL) which, being needed elsewhere, lightered to a replacement lightering tanker.  The replacement lightering tanker eventually lightering to the Agathonissos after the Agathonissos was repaired.  The owner of the Agathonissos alleged the supply vessel was unseaworthy due to its crew and held the Agathonissos’s charterer liable.  The charterer alleged the same of the Agathonissos.  Charterer also attempted to rely upon clauses 6 and 7 of ASBATANKVOY to deduct time from counting.  Owner pointed to two clauses in the C/P, Clauses 9 and 19 of ASBATANKVOY, within which the charterer assumes the risk and peril of a lightering and neither party is to be held liable under certain circumstances.

To access this post, you must purchase Annual Subscription or 2 Year Subscription.

Tenacity Marine Inc. v Ecopetrol, S.A. (The “Tenacity”) – SMA 4311, 20 April 2017

EXXONMOBILVOY2005 – DEMURRAGE – DELAY DUE TO FOG – WHETHER GALENA PARK A PORT OR IN THE PORT OF HOUSTON – WHETHER HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL A RIVERPORT – RIVERPORT CLAUSE – DISPUTE OVER BURDEN OF PROOF – Charterer Award

When charterer deducted fifty percent of a delay due to fog basis an exceptions clause, owner countered that the Houston Ship Channel was a riverport and thus the “Riverport(s) Clause” applied with the weather delay subsequently counting in full.  In addressing this question, the Panel also advised as to where the burden of proof would lie and whether Galena Park was a port.

To access this post, you must purchase Annual Subscription or 2 Year Subscription.

Interoceanic Corporation v Helm Dungemittel GMBH and Helm Fertilizer Corp. – SMA 4305, March 3, 2017

FOB SALE – VESSEL ARRIVING LATE – SECOND VESSEL NOMINATED – CONTRACT AMENDED FOR NEW LAYCAN – PRODUCER’S MARKETER CLAIMED DAMAGES FOR ALLEGED EFFORTS TO AVOID PLANT SHUTDOWN – BUYER CLAIMED FOR DEMURRAGE AND DAMAGES DUE TO MISSED OPPORTUNITY

A contract was fixed for the sale of ammonium sulfate to be loaded in Pasadena, Texas. After the originally nominated vessel was to miss the laycan, a replacement vessel was nominated. The contract was then re-negotiated with a new window and cargo quantity. Later, the producer’s marketer claimed for damages incurred when several barges were loaded to avoid a plant shutdown. The buyer claimed for demurrage and damages due to a missed opportunity.

To access this post, you must purchase Annual Subscription or 2 Year Subscription.

Seatrade Group N.V. v Isabella Shipping Company Limited (The “Santa Catharina”) – SMA 4303, 21 February 2017

TIME CHARTER – VESSEL CRANE FAILURE – UNABLE TO USE 1 HOLD ON THE SHIP – CHARTERER WITHHELD A PROPORTIONATE SHARE OF HIRE – OWNER BELIEVED HIRE DUE IN FULL – CHARTERER GOING OUT OF BUSINESS – PARTIAL AWARD FOR SECURITY Although continuing to trade, due to a crane breakdown onboard a time chartered vessel...

To access this post, you must purchase Annual Subscription or 2 Year Subscription.