2024 Maritime Digest of Arbitration Awards and Court Rulings

Oslo Caribbean Carrier v Knowles Construction & Development Co. Ltd. (The “SEA CARRIER”), SMA No. 4463, 3 August 2023

PARTIAL PAYMENT – DAMAGES FOR DENTENTION – DEMURRAGE – FAILURE TO APPOINT ARBITRATOR – ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF DEBT – FAILURE TO MAKE PAYMENT

This arbitration involved a charterparty for the transport of bulk aggregate sand from Kingston, Jamaica, to Nassau, Bahamas. Oslo Caribbean Carrier AS, the owner of the M/V SEA CARRIER, claimed outstanding demurrage payment and interest from Knowles Construction & Development Co. Ltd., the charterer.

Naviera Transoceanica and Products Tankers Management Company v PetroChina International (America) Inc. – SMA No. 4464, 29 August 2023

VOYAGE SPEED – WEATHER – DEMURRAGE CLAIM – OWNERS GUARANTEE – SLOW STEAMING – ASBATANKVOY

A voyage charter was made for the transport of clean petroleum product (CPP) from Cherry Point, Washington, to a Chilean port of the Charterer’s choice. Owners initiated arbitration seeking a partial final award of outstanding demurrage, plus interest, costs, and attorneys’ fees. Charterer disputed the claim, asserting that the vessel failed to meet the charterparty speed and failed to adhere to voyage orders, resulting in a missed discharge window.

Dorval SC Tankers Inc. v SeaRiver Maritime, LLC, (The “GOLDEN AUSTRALIS”) – SMA No. 4465, 7 September 2023

EMVOY 2012 – WITHHELD SAMPLES – SAMPLE CONTAMINATION – JOINT SAMPLE TESTING – ARBITRABILITY – CAUSE OF CONTAMINATION

An Owner and Charterer entered into a Contract of Affreightment (COA) for the transportation of bulk chemical products from Singapore to Australia. Sampling at the discharge revealed water droplets and cloudiness in the cargo. The Charterer withheld samples from the discharge from joint testing that was requested by the Owner to determine the cause of contamination.

Teekay Tankers Chartering Pte. Ltd. v SeaRiver Maritime LLC. (The “ZENITH SPIRIT”) – SMA No. 4467, 22 September 2023

EMVOY SPECIAL CLAUSE 15 – EXXONMOBILE VOY2012 – CARGO STORAGE – DAMAGES – AUTHORITY OF BROKER TO REPRESENT BOTH PARTIES – MEETING OF THE MINDS

The dispute between SeaRiver Maritime (Charterer) and Teekay Tankers Chartering (Owner) revolved around the terms of a charter party agreement for the vessel ZENITH SPIRIT. The key point of contention was the interpretation of Special Clause 15 from the contract written on an ExxonMobile VOY2012, with Owner claiming a guaranteed minimum of 90 days of storage, while Charterer contended that storage was at Charterer’s option.

London Arbitration 5/23

BREACH OF CHARTERPARTY – DISCHARGING CARGO WITH A LIEN – VIOLATION OF CHARTERER’S ORDERS FOR DISCHARGING CARGO
In London Arbitration 4/23, a dispute arose between charterers and owners regarding cargo discharge instructions leading to this counterclaim. The charterers asserted that they instructed the owners not to unload cargo, for they were exercising a lien on the cargo to recover $3,705,033 owed by sub-charterers. Owners proceeded to unload the cargo, which charterers claimed invalidated the lien. Charterers claimed a breach of the charter and sought damages equal to the lien amount.

Phibro Renewables AG v. Formosa Plastic Marine Corp. – SMA No. 4462, 25 July 2023

CHARTERPARTY BREACH – LATE DELIVERY – CARGO SPECIFICATIONS – ABANDONED CARGO – VESSEL SUBSTITUTION
In this arbitration between Phibro Renewables AG (Charterer) and Formosa Plastic Marine Corporation (Owner), disputes arose from a charterparty agreement concerning the transportation of 5,000 metric tons of UCOME. Charterer claimed damages due to alleged breaches by Owner, including late delivery and vessel substitution, while Owner counterclaimed due to alleged cargo loss.

FIMBank plc v. KCH Shipping Co Ltd– Court of Appeal, 24 May 2023

TIME BAR – DEMURRAGE – MISDELIVERY OF CARGO – HAGUE-VISBY RULES – CONGENBILL FORM – BILLS OF LADING – FINANCING OF CARGO
FIMBank appealed a decision regarding the misdelivery of cargo, revolving around the application of the Hague-Visby Rules and the time bar provision. The Court of Appeal analyzed the evolution of the Hague-Visby rule’s wording and its implications. The court also examined the potential of an implied term within the bills of lading.

Mitsui & Co (USA) Inc v. Asia-Potash International Investment (Guangzhou) Co Ltd, KBD (Comm. Ct),  15 May 2023

BREACH OF CONTRACT – NOT RE-BERTHING VESSEL TO LOAD CARGO – INDEMNITY FOR LOSSES INCURRED EARLIER – CHAIN OF CONTRACTS – REMOTENESS – ERROR OF LAW – ARBITRATION ACT 1996, SECTION 69
In May 2012, Mitsui agreed to sell 60,000 metric tons of Brazilian soybeans to DGO. The cargo was to be delivered to the Santos port by July 31, 2012, with payment through a letter of credit. While loading, the vessel broke its moorings, caused damage to the port equipment, and was detained with the remaining cargo onboard. DGO claimed contract termination, which Mitsui initially contested but later accepted in January 2013. A complex chain of sales and purchases was involved, leading to arbitration. The FOSFA Board of Appeal found DGO breached the contract by not re-berthing a vessel, awarding damages of US$7,007,430 to Mitsui. However, Mitsui’s claims for indemnity and losses suffered in the sales chain were rejected due to perceived remoteness. Mitsui appealed, alleging errors in the law regarding remoteness and citing Clause 29 of the Arbitration Act 1996.

Smart Gain Shipping Co Ltd v. Langlois Enterprises Ltd (The “Globe Danae”) – KBD (Comm Ct) , 5 July 2023

APPEAL – UNDERWATER CLEANING “ALWAYS AT CHARTERERS’ TIME AND EXPENSE” – ON-HIRE RATES FOR CLEANING AFTER EXPIRY OF CHARTERPARTY – HULL FOULING – NYPE FORM – SECTION 69 OF THE ARBITRATION ACT 1996
Langlois (Owners) chartered the vessel, MV Globe Danae, to Smart Gain (Charterers) for a trip from India to Brazil carrying metallurgical coke. The dispute arose from clause (86) in the charterparty regarding hull fouling. Langlois claimed compensation for time spent on cleaning, based on clause 86, while Smart Gain argued cleaning obligations ceased upon redelivery. This was an appeal of a partial arbitration award from October 2022.

Shell Trading U.S. Company v. Vinmar International Ltd. (M/T “SOLAR NESRIN”) – SMA No. 4461, 26 June 2023

UNPAID DEMURRAGE – VINMAR TERMS – UNPAID INTEREST, COSTS, AND FEES – PARTIAL PAYMENTS
On January 28, 2023, SHELL issued a demurrage invoice to VINMAR in the amount of $ 77,079.84, as per the laytime calculations with a due date of 1 March 2021. VINMAR did not dispute the demurrage charges but argued the invoice should be reduced by balances allegedly owed to VINMAR by a different SHELL entity from an unrelated transaction. SHELL initiated arbitration for recovery, subsequently receiving partial payment by VINMAR of the disputed amount. SHELL continued with arbitration proceedings to reclaim the remaining unpaid demurrage, associated costs, fees, and interest.